NationStates Jolt Archive

While looking at many regions, I've discovered a few that claim to be "Pro-UN", but that don't really seem to participate in the UN debates here.

I was wondering what other nations felt "Pro-UN" means?

My impression is that some regional founders / delegates use it as a means to attract nations into their region. But I think it is something of a mislabel if said regions do not participate in the UN.

That said, I wanted to get a feel for how other nations feel about this? To me it seems deceptive, but that could be a national bias at work.

I do not believe most regions are pro-UN or even take part, as a whole region, in United Nations debates or practices; many regions do try and hold votes to determine what way their Delegate will on a resolution - such as my region - but, unfortunately, the larger the region you have, the more nations in that region that do not necessarily take part in regional debate, let alone forum debate as we have here.

I do not believe most regions are pro-UN or even take part, as a whole region, in United Nations debates or practices; many regions do try and hold votes to determine what way their Delegate will on a resolution - such as my region - but, unfortunately, the larger the region you have, the more nations in that region that do not necessarily take part in regional debate, let alone forum debate as we have here.

Right, and holding votes is a pro-democratic and good thing, but I'm wondering how many nations that claim to be "pro-UN" actually participate in the UN.

Your region obviously does, because you are endorsing proposals and participating in the forums. And it doesn't have to be a Delegate doing this. A liasion reporting back is good enough.

It is just hard to tell, because all too often the flow of information is fragmented. How much of the UN debate and discussion makes it to other regions? I'd guess less than half, but I really have no basis for that.

Ultimately I must admit that I'm begining to get frustrated with the UN. Not the nations that are here. These nations I respect. And this doesn't mean I disrespect nations that aren't here.

But I do feel that, to make liberal use of a catch-phrase, that too many nations judge a book by its cover. In short, that they are quick to claim to be liberal or conservative, pro-UN or anti-UN, when in reality they aren't really either.

While this is their right, and I'll support that, I also feel that it means that those of us that do work hard in the UN are doing so in a vaccum.

If somebody doesn't explain why they vote yes, active UN members assume there is some ignorant "sheep" vote at work. If somebody doesn't explain why they vote no, active UN members assume there is some anti-UN hostility / sour grapes at work.

While I'm sure that most nations fall no-where near this, feedback is important. Most importantly I would think feedback from regions would be helpful. However, maybe that is unrealistic. Maybe that is the nature of having thousands of nations? *shrug*

I'd like to actually suggest that the Goontopians might be an example of a series of pro-UN regions!

This doesn't mean they will vote yes on everything, but we've all seen that many Goontopian delegates are taking an interest in the UN forum and proposal queue. I'd say that is active.

And more importantly, they *are* communicating with each other to some degree (my government has seen one communication that we were most certainly not supposed to see). ;)


But now to turn this back, if you hear "pro-UN" do you feel that means "active in the UN", likely to vote yes in the UN, or something else, perhaps hosts regional debates on UN resolutions?

I am so happy an encouraged that Mikitivity has empowered him/herself as the determining perspective of what Pro-UN means.

In conversations with this zealot sounding individual, I was amazed at how many disparaging remarks he made of my Nation and my Region's character. I have kept a copy for prosperity.

Democracy requires no explanation for one's perspective. The example of a secret ballot is indicative of the freedom to choose regardless of another's position. In fact, an open ballot is an invitation for coercion of one person’s vote.

Additionally, the requirement for UN participation does not even include active voting let alone discussion in the forum. To claim that I or my Region is not Pro-UN because we choose to vote against a resolution is ignorance of democracy at the very least; fascism at the worst.

Mikeswill
UN Delegate
NationStates Region

I am so happy an encouraged that Mikitivity has empowered him/herself as the determining perspective of what Pro-UN means.

In conversations with this zealot sounding individual, I was amazed at how many disparaging remarks he made of my Nation and my Region's character. I have kept a copy for prosperity.

Democracy requires no explanation for one's perspective. The example of a secret ballot is indicative of the freedom to choose regardless of another's position. In fact, an open ballot is an invitation for coercion of one person’s vote.

Additionally, the requirement for UN participation does not even include active voting let alone discussion in the forum. To claim that I or my Region is not Pro-UN because we choose to vote against a resolution is ignorance of democracy at the very least; fascism at the worst.

Mikeswill
UN Delegate
NationStates Region

I've offered my government's opinions on what "Pro-UN" means, and would be happy to hear what others have to say. I've always felt that "Pro-UN" means that a nation or region takes a proactive interest in the UN, and is willing to participate in these official NS forums. Either a UN Delegate or liason for the region in question would do this.

I read your region's description, and it claims to be "Pro-UN". Does that mean we can look forward to more nations from the NationStates region participating in the UN? I feel that we could benefit if your nations would participate in more than just voting. If your nations could perhaps participate in drafting resolutions (as many of us here will tell you that many resolutions spend weeks in draft stage before reaching the UN floor and are the product of many "Pro-UN" nations).

We might not all agree with one another, but we certainly believe that being "Proactive" in the UN, is the best way to improve the quality of this body.

On a side note: Mikitivity ~ I have removed the "Ignore" screen on your Nation thereby allowing you to directly telegram my Nation once again.

If you want to bully or impose upon other Sovereign Nations of the NationStates Region of what your opinion of the definition of Pro-UN, be my guest. The Nations of the Enlightened Region I humbly serve are quite capable of determining their perspectives and levels of participation.

However, you are not the Delegate of my Region. You may campaign for the success of a Resolution at your will, but to respond with childish name-calling of myself and my Region upon a difference of opinion shall not be tolerated by myself.

Should the Esteemed Nations of the Region I serve choose a different course they shall inform me by choosing another servant as their representative in the UN.

Democracy: It can work for you.

Mikeswill

On a side note: Mikitivity ~ I have removed the "Ignore" screen on your Nation thereby allowing you to directly telegram my Nation once again.

If you want to bully or impose upon other Sovereign Nations of the NationStates Region of what your opinion of the definition of Pro-UN, be my guest. The Nations of the Enlightened Region I humbly serve are quite capable of determining their perspectives and levels of participation.

However, you are not the Delegate of my Region. You may campaign for the success of a Resolution at your will, but to respond with childish name-calling of myself and my Region upon a difference of opinion shall not be tolerated by myself.

Should the Esteemed Nations of the Region I serve choose a different course they shall inform me by choosing another servant as their representative in the UN.

Democracy: It can work for you.

Mikeswill


My issue here is that I'd like to encourage Delegates that claim to be "pro-UN" to actually take an interest in the UN.

I think claiming to be pro-UN, but not telling the UN what it can do for you and then complaining about how it interferes with your sovereign rights is short-sighted and closed-minded.

Many resolutions are drafted here as proposals in these forums. But when they reach the UN floor new nations will come in and complain, and UN Delegates (who could have seen them as proposals if they'd scan the list twice a week) have a chance to talk about them too.

I'll use an example of a resolution that isn't mine: the Law of the Sea. Many nations supported that proposal here in the forum. I feel very sorry for its sponsor Serconea because he / she put a great deal of work into that resolution, only to be bashed by a bunch of people that:

(1) paid no attention to the UN, yet claimed to be "pro-UN",

(2) voted against the resolution, not based on its text, but because they are playing to become the WORLD BENCHMARK or some other silly idea, and only focus on the categories.

The author did EVERYTHING in his or her power to collect input. And was rewarded by rude replies.

I can actually understand this type of behavior in regions that are small or anti-UN. I don't send a telegram to "Nazi Germany" expecting to get a polite response. Heck, I'm sure my telegram would be returned with a V2 rocket or something.

But there is a difference. Nazi Germany (just an example folks) isn't implying that he / she wants to work *with* the UN. You can't work with the UN in a vaccuum, because although there are telepaths in the UN, the tin foil hats most UN Delegates wear seem to prevent mind reading.

My basic point about "pro-UN" ... a lot of players work hard, and when they see that label, they don't expect a nation or delegate that has no intention of replying to UN forum posts.

I know that XG, myself, and Groot, all pop in here and bring UN news back to our region. The other IDU nations coordinate with other regions or search the proposal lists themselves. While I think we are a rare exception where most UN members take an active interest in the UN, I would think that *any* region which is advertising itself as "Pro-UN" would actually participate in the UN. I honestly don't think calling me a facsist is fair. Why not? Because if you'd bother to read *any* of my posts or prior resolutions, I've never suggested that people shouldn't come and discuss issues and then vote on them.

But I do believe that misusing a label, in this case "Pro-UN" is not only deceptive, but it is very unfair to many other players. I don't care if you hate me and if your 200 votes constantly go against me. Follow me throughout the NS forums!

But please make a point to put the "PRO" back into "Pro-UN" and actually provide feedback to UN members on their draft resolutions. Imagine the shock they get when somebody who claims to read posts and resolutions suddenly votes agains them and doesn't explain why?

The Pacific regions are very good about responding to and explaining why they vote the ways they do. I've actually had contact with a nation in each of the Pacifics and though some of their regions will vote against my resolution, they all participated in the draft process by sending a representative here.

Goontopia too has been very active in the UN. They tend to work via telegrams, but even that has great value.

I can appreciate your passion and effort, but to attempt to bully my vote via name-calling as opposed to the merits of your resolution is fascist.

My history with these forums is sparse mostly due to the dificulty of my home computer to upload this link. Secondly, I do not believe that there exists any due process on this forum as my previous incarnation was given no oppportunity to respond to his demise prior to the topic being closed. See Mikes Hope.

Yet I digress.

My Region has its own forum whereby each UN Resolution is posted for discussion and debate. Additionally, each Resolution is posted on the Regional Message Board. On occassion the Nations respond. Other times they acceed to my vote.

Our Region's direction in how we vote is quite frankly none of your business as you do not reside in our Region. It is a matter of Self-Determination (a concept of Sovereignty) which seems to been lost on the past few generations.

The lesson of Democracy is that no matter how much hard work you put into something; no matter how right you believe that you are; no matter how enlightened your ideal; the right of dissent is manifest.

Without dissent there exists no democracy no matter what spin you put into your propaganda. The world is not perfect. The system is flawed. But free speech should never be bullied.

You attempted to bully my vote. Period.

Again, I shall not tolerate such action regardless of your intentions.

In the spirit of MH and TJ

I remain

mikey

I want to add that there are anti-UN regions as well. I'm not concerned about these, because they are very up front about their dislike of what is often described as the "liberal bias" of the UN.

While I disagree with their opinion, as a pro-UN nation I do actually appreciate that they use an accurate label, because it let's me know that there is little point in me expecting a political ally from their region.

I've always felt that "Pro-UN" means that a nation or region takes a proactive interest in the UN, and is willing to participate in these official NS forums. Either a UN Delegate or liason for the region in question would do this.

I'm from the great region of Gatesville, an anti-UN region. To define anti-UN, we oppose the fact that liberal, ridiculous resolutions are passed by the sheep who vote for something because it sounds good, and disregard the fact that such resolutions often trod upon national sovereignty. I should add that I personally support you're own resolution. It's well written, gives the UN nations a goal, but doesn't force them to do something.

As you might guess, given that we oppose the UN, we take "a proactive interest in the UN, and (we are) willing to participate in" UN forums. According to your definition, that makes us Pro-UN. Personally, I've always classified pro-UN regions and nations as those that support what it stands for and the resolutions it passes, while the anti-UN regions either don't support what the UN stands for (like Gatesville) or don't think the UN should exist at all.

Basically, I don't think you can really do the black white thing, for or against the UN. I think the UN is a great idea, and I am involved in the forums, but at the same time I don't agree with it's too oft left-leaning tendencies. Am I Pro-UN? I guess I am. But I am also Anti-UN at the same time.

I can appreciate your passion and effort, but to attempt to bully my vote via name-calling as opposed to the merits of your resolution is fascist.


Name calling???

Self-righteous
Fascist
Bully

The reason I'm upset with you, isn't because you are calling me a Nazi or Darth Vader or EVIL. Sticks and stones ... people here will judge me not on what you want to call me, but on how I've treated them for months.

But I really wish that you'd stop claiming your region is pro-UN if you aren't going to participate in the UN discussions on the official forum. Not you personally, but it would be great if your region had a liasion, so that those of us whom really do care about the UN and not just our "Game Stats" could network with this person.

Many of us spend a month per resolution, and while we expect regions like gatesville (which is clearly anti-UN) to shoot us down, we can't help a "Pro-UN" region if it doesn't participate in the UN.

I'm from the great region of Gatesville, an anti-UN region. To define anti-UN, we oppose the fact that liberal, ridiculous resolutions are passed by the sheep who vote for something because it sounds good, and disregard the fact that such resolutions often trod upon national sovereignty. I should add that I personally support you're own resolution. It's well written, gives the UN nations a goal, but doesn't force them to do something.

As you might guess, given that we oppose the UN, we take "a proactive interest in the UN, and (we are) willing to participate in" UN forums. According to your definition, that makes us Pro-UN. Personally, I've always classified pro-UN regions and nations as those that support what it stands for and the resolutions it passes, while the anti-UN regions either don't support what the UN stands for (like Gatesville) or don't think the UN should exist at all.

Basically, I don't think you can really do the black white thing, for or against the UN. I think the UN is a great idea, and I am involved in the forums, but at the same time I don't agree with it's too oft left-leaning tendencies. Am I Pro-UN? I guess I am. But I am also Anti-UN at the same time.

*blushing*

I stand corrected then, because your nation has actually participated in many UN debates, and I *would* have assumed that to being pro-UN.

I've been working on a series of "Contact" and "Do Not Contact" lists for regions. When my intel suggested that your region was anti-UN based on the description, I just avoided asking your Delegate if he / she (which should be Rose Colored Glasses IIRC) wanted to be a part of the list (though I did not just automatically pin Gatesville down as a do not contact).

To be fair though, Gatesville did say it doesn't like the "liberal" bias of the UN, and there are some resolutions that are certainly not liberal.

I really just wish there were in fact better labels, as I've been working to find ways to bring more of the regions that are interested in most of what the UN does *back* to the UN.

Minding my own business I received the folowing un-solicited telegrams (the times were from when I copied and pasted same onto Word):

The Confederated City States of Mikitivity
Received: 83 minutes ago Hello,

I see you've voted against my resolution, and I fear it is due to game stats and not the resolution text. Though your region may have debated my resolution, I hope that in all fairness that you'd consider asking your nations to list to my defense of the resolution before passing judgement. My nation is EXTREMELY active in the UN and is pro-UN (which your region claims to me).

There is overwhelming support for my resolution in the UN forum, and in particular I'd like to direct your attention to the following UN argument:

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7187752&postcount=38

There is of course a thread, and I've been discussing this in the North, East, and West Pacifics, where I also have a large support base. I have to say that I'm a bit saddened by what I fear is playing NationStates for "game stats" and not looking at the text, because I'm not sure any your pro-UN region has actually been participating in the UN forum discussions on this resolution which started believe it or not, over a month ago! Had I known that your region had objections (and I don't know where or why) I would have honestly tried to accomidate that, because in the past I once considered your region a pro-UN ally. :(

10kMichael


The Confederated City States of Mikitivity
Received: 26 minutes ago Anti-UN would be not participating in the UN.

I'd invite you to actually participate in the UN *for once*.

As for playing the game for just game stats impacts, I think that is a shame. Judging a resolution or proposal based on a category alone is no better than judging a person based on his / her gender / skin color or religion.

But I'm glad to know that instead of looking beyond the skin that you do judge a book based on its cover.

P.S. are you the same player that was formerly MikesHope? I was hoping to ask you why you changed your nations name?

P.S. I originally didn't mean to offend you, and do honestly apologize to that. I had assumed you *were* Mikeshope whom was very kind to me in the past. But I do think it is being dishonest for any Regional Founder / Delegate to advertise his / her region as being "pro-UN" when they are not active in the official UN forum and tend to vote against UN resolutions. :( It is like saying you are "liberal" but then voting constantly with Republicans. While I would have hoped that instead of attacking me and calling me closed minded, that at *worst* that I'd convince you that maybe if you are going to claim to be "pro-UN" that you'd realize that includes participating in the UN ... and being diverse. I worked VERY hard and dealt with the moderators for my resolution, and a "democratic" and open-minded person would respond with a willingness to listen to that. Again, my apologies for mistaking you for MikesHope who displayed this willingness in the past.

Mikitivity has their opinion.
Mikeswill has his.

Our vote remains against.

Next time try diplomacy and not sarcasm as I vote on every resolution.

In the Spirit of Mikes Hope...

Peace my Brothers and Sisters.

mikey

And we have voted for and actively petioned some of the previous resolutions, while letting others go simply because we felt they weren't worth the effort, and didn't matter to us as a region one way or another. We gladly support resolutions that aren't excessively liberal, and even more importantly, do not infringe on national sovereignty.

Note to self, when editing rave / rant, use edit function and don't click delete by mistake ... :rolleyes:

I always thought of the " pro-U.N. " regions being those who set up a off-site forum / poll thing where all natives can register and vote, and by a majority vote similar how the N.S.U.N decides itself, the delegate has a better opinion of the will of the people who put their faith in them. For example, a clear cut majority may cause the delegate to cast their vote in that direction, while a 50 / 50 or similar division may cause them to vote on their own moral ( ewww, I used the evil word, ;) ) views.

Then again, there are some " pro-U.N. " regions who simply support the N.S.U.N in that they vote, and take an interest in what happens, and bitch about it on their region H.Q. or off-site forum, when it does not go their way ...

And yes, there are those who drop it into thei regional recruit telegrams like " their regional economy and banking system " ... :rolleyes:

Which kind of annoys me in that it prolly takes it into the new players head they should join this U.N. which they do, and as soon as they work out they can write a proposal, ( that lovely link on the U.N. page ... ) they jam it right on in before they even see the U.N. Forum ... and perhaps have a clue as to how it " should " be done ...

And we have voted for and actively petioned some of the previous resolutions, while letting others go simply because we felt they weren't worth the effort, and didn't matter to us as a region one way or another. We gladly support resolutions that aren't excessively liberal, and even more importantly, do not infringe on national sovereignty.

I'd like to steer this thread back to the original point, people wanting to sling mud at me can do that elsewhere ... I'll create a thread for that. ;)

See, I'd call that Pro-UN. Pro-UN doesn't mean that you vote in favour of everything. And Pro-UN does mean simply "you vote". Nearly all of our nations vote on UN resolutions. Heck, I'd say it is a big accomplishment when a nation actually *reads* a resolution and votes on the text of the resolution and not just the UN resolution category and projected game stats changes.

I wonder if perhaps a better method would be continue to build a better category focused "Contact" and "Do Not Contact" lists?

The reason I say this, is what is the point in writing a resolution with any text at all, if UN Delegates are going to claim to care about the UN, but never read the UN debate and just vote on the category alone? Furthermore, now that we have repeals, how can nations that submit repeals have material to site when trying to write a better resolution?

I always thought of the " pro-U.N. " regions being those who set up a off-site forum / poll thing where all natives can register and vote, and by a majority vote similar how the N.S.U.N decides itself, the delegate has a better opinion of the will of the people who put their faith in them. For example, a clear cut majority may cause the delegate to cast their vote in that direction, while a 50 / 50 or similar division may cause them to vote on their own moral ( ewww, I used the evil word, ;) ) views.


LOL!

OK, there is pepsi on my keyboard now. I plan to send your government the bill.

Seriously, how can we, the active UN members (and observers) help improve the quality of the UN, when a region that considers itself "Pro-UN" because it just votes, but actually never drops into the UN (unless it is pissed at a resolution author)?

My chief fear is that we are operating in a vaccum. We are making longer resolutions, because we are assuming that few UN Delegates are not really passing along the debates and justifications that accompany UN resolutions. But even longer resolutions are a handicap. The "it-hurts-my-head" factor is nearly as deadly as, "But gee, this doesn't say it improves my civil / political / economic freedoms, why should I bother reading the rest of this?" does.

Similar to this, remember how many new nations joined to yell at the Powerhungry Chipmunks? Where are these nations now? I think we won't see them again until they are angry about some other UN resolution, but "Pro-UN" should IMHO mean something more than, "I sit around at home and vote, so I'm pro-UN, and come to yell at the UN when I see a resolution I don't like."

For those of you with construction backgrounds, you'll recall that the best time to save costs associated with changes in a project is actually when those changes are implemented during the conceptual or design phase of the projects. If you make a change mid-through the construction process, you essentially are throwing away most of your completed work.

The same is true with the UN. Arguing about a resolution, say because it reads 20 km instead of 200 km, or because the word terrorist isn't defined, or because you think its sponsor is an asshole, would be much more effective when the resolution is a proposal.

Three of the past four resolutions all were debated as proposals for over a month each before hitting the floor. Anybody "Pro-UN" (i.e. interested in the UN) should have known they were going to be a reality, because it is a hell of a lot of work to collect 130+ endorsements.

I maintain that anybody claiming to be interested in the UN has an obligation to do more than just be an armchair quarterback. You don't have to be a UN delegate or member. Komokom is the perfect example. Komokom still has considerable influence. Axis Nova does as well, and has not been in the UN for some time.

But these two nations are proactive in the UN. They might not be liberal or conservative, but they have shown to all of us here that they will offer constructive advice. I'd like to see more of that.

OK, there is pepsi on my keyboard now. I plan to send your government the bill.This will come to nothing, we do not recognise Pepsi,

>.>

<.<

>.>

...Seriously, how can we, the active UN members (and observers) help improve the quality of the UN, when a region that considers itself "Pro-UN" because it just votes, but actually never drops into the UN (unless it is pissed at a resolution author)?We probably can't ... because we don't control their minds. I take heart in the fact that at least they care ( the delegates ) what their region members think. That is at leeast something.

My chief fearChief Fear, meet Running Horse Concern and Sky-Cloud Panic. ;)is that we are operating in a vacum.Can't .... BREATHE ! ( gag )We are making longer resolutions, because we are assuming that few UN Delegates are not really passing along the debates and justifications that accompany UN resolutions.Actually, I just buried enough wording in mine to get my own objectives passed. Mu hu ha ha ha and all that. ;)But even longer resolutions are a handicap. The "it-hurts-my-head" factor is nearly as deadly as, "But gee, this doesn't say it improves my civil / political / economic freedoms, why should I bother reading the rest of this?" does.True, but thank-fully the " sheep vote " pretty titles and lots of big meaning-filled clauses can carry the day.

Oh, and my un-dying faith in the common sense of the voters, and ...

Well, maybe not the last bit ... Hey, have you seen my new big pretty title for ...

;)Similar to this, remember how many new nations joined to yell at the Powerhungry Chipmunks?I missed most of that, but hey, at least they got off their butts and did something.Where are these nations now?I see ... reality T.V. show ... I recoil ... in horror ... ;)I think we won't see them again until they are angry about some other UN resolution,Hmmm, I know what you mean, but I fail to see the problem. If they are angry enough to actually question a resolution then at least they are active enough to sign up, come in and say " dude, W.T.F. is this ? "but "Pro-UN" should IMHO mean something more than, "I sit around at home and vote, so I'm pro-UN, and come to yell at the UN when I see a resolution I don't like."Well, as I said, at least they do vote, and at least they can get angry enough to turn up and say something.

Sure it would be nice if they took part in the development process on-forum, but they have that choice as just that, a - choice - , its not compulsory, and come to think of it, I would not want it to be.

Remember, alot of N.S.U.N members only join because they like the badge, or, they like to invade / defend / protect their region. Do we want those non-interested people as really pro-U.N. ?For those of you with construction backgrounds, you'll recall that the best time to save costs associated with changes in a project is actually when those changes are implemented during the conceptual or design phase of the projects. If you make a change mid-through the construction process, you essentially are throwing away most of your completed work.I just thought up an LEGO analogy to that,

* Closes that FF tab and concentrates on post, ;)The same is true with the UN. Arguing about a resolution, say because it reads 20 km instead of 200 km, or because the word terrorist isn't defined, or because you think its sponsor is an asshole, would be much more effective when the resolution is a proposal.Of course it would. But aside from making thought-full comment mandatory as part of member-ship, I fail to see how this can be changed. We can't ( much as we may wish ) make intelligent thought mandatory.

Three of the past four resolutions all were debated as proposals for over a month each before hitting the floor. Anybody "Pro-UN" (i.e. interested in the UN) should have known they were going to be a reality, because it is a hell of a lot of work to collect 130+ endorsements.Been there, done that, got the T-Shirt ... actually, that could be a good branch of N.S. merchandise,

" I got 130 N.S.U.N endorsements today, and all I got was ... " :DI maintain that anybody claiming to be interested in the UN has an obligation to do more than just be an armchair quarterback.Aside from mandatory voting and mandatory intelligent thought, what can we do ?You don't have to be a UN delegate or member.Hey, my ears are burning,Komokom is the perfect example.1 ... 2 ... 3 ... Komokom still has considerable influence.Awww. I feel loved. Flattery will get you some-where, I supose ...Axis Nova does as well, and has not been in the UN for some time.Yes, possibly the only sensible goon-topian I've seen so far. They seem fairly okay on mIRC too. I suppose proof that no matter what the circumstance of joining, newer members can certainly contribute well.But these two nations are proactive in the UN.Yep. I have been on a break for a bit but as you see I still will stick my head up now and again.They might not be liberal or conservative, but they have shown to all of us here that they will offer constructive advice. I'd like to see more of that.Ohhh, I don't know if you'd take ALL my advice so well, ;)

OOC:

I'd like to steer this thread back to the original point, people wanting to sling mud at me can do that elsewhere ... I'll create a thread for that. Top. Where is it? ;)

See, I'd call that Pro-UN. Pro-UN doesn't mean that you vote in favour of everything. And Pro-UN does mean simply "you vote". Nearly all of our nations vote on UN resolutions. Heck, I'd say it is a big accomplishment when a nation actually *reads* a resolution and votes on the text of the resolution and not just the UN resolution category and projected game stats changes.

I wonder if perhaps a better method would be continue to build a better category focused "Contact" and "Do Not Contact" lists?
That's an interesting point. I think what it comes down for me is the difference between being anti UN in RP terms and anti UN in RL. So I'd argue that while Gatesville is anti UN in RP (in the sense we wish to challenge and eventually overthrow the dominant ideology) that differs greatly from the effects in gameplay. I'd actually argue that for the UN subgame to work well regions like ours play a vital role. Essentially, the whole UN forum would get dull very quickly if we had consensus on the vast majority of issues. So an articulate opposition is important to keep the game interesting.
The reason I say this, is what is the point in writing a resolution with any text at all, if UN Delegates are going to claim to care about the UN, but never read the UN debate and just vote on the category alone? Furthermore, now that we have repeals, how can nations that submit repeals have material to site when trying to write a better resolution?
I think you're being overly pessimistic here. Couple of points. Firstly, remember that those nations (as opposed to delegates) who don't read motions or the UN forum are normally reading posts in the message board and off site forums by those whom do. So convincing those members of the region who do participate fully in the UN of why they should or shouldn't support your motion has a knock on effect in terms of votes. Secondly, with those delegates who always block vote with others on motions what you need to do is work out who are central to those power blocs and target them- a bit like the RL UN.

The NationStates Region has 424 Nations at the time of this post.

Of these 424 Nations, 301 Nations are UN Memebers resulting in a UN Memebership of 71% of the Nations in the Region.

Additionally, 258 of the 301 UN Memeber Nations (85.7%) have endorsed our Regional Delegate.

I believe that these figures can not be surpassed by any other member-created Region. There may exist larger Regions, but even the UN Delegate from Gatesville has less Endorsements.

Therefore, I, The Mikes Hope Essence of Mikeswill, Humble Servant and UN Delegate, assert that the NationStates Region is the Most Pro-UN Region in the Land.

Peace

T.R. Kom also notes that one should keep ones " regional patriotism " to a minimum around here ...

I believe that these figures can not be surpassed by any other member-created Region. There may exist larger Regions, but even the UN Delegate from Gatesville has less Endorsements.

Therefore, I, The Mikes Hope Essence of Mikeswill, Humble Servant and UN Delegate, assert that the NationStates Region is the Most Pro-UN Region in the Land.

Peace

And there are smaller regions that have a larger fraction of UN members.

The point behind being "Pro-UN" isn't waving around a flag and never really doing anything *except* for voting on UN motions. Pro-UN nations should actively participate in this forum and make suggestions for resolutions.

Why?
What you are stating is your own subjective maxin on being Pro UN and proffer no reason as to why it should be considered practical law.

Do you want all voting NS to fill out a comment card each time they vote? Would writing yea or nea in the forum thread count?

Because attempts to capitalize on the term Pro UN have not been adventageous does justify an attempt to define the term and its use. However, it does not justify herassing other nations about their use of the term because it is felt that Pro UN NS should be in agreement with a proposed resolution.

The NationStates Region has 424 Nations at the time of this post.

Of these 424 Nations, 301 Nations are UN Memebers resulting in a UN Memebership of 71% of the Nations in the Region.

Additionally, 258 of the 301 UN Memeber Nations (85.7%) have endorsed our Regional Delegate.

I believe that these figures can not be surpassed by any other member-created Region.

Depends. If raw percents are all that matter (which seems to be your method here), a region with two nations, both in the UN, one endorcing the other would be more "pro-UN", as 100% are in the UN and 100% of non-Delegate nations support the Delegate. ;)

FACT: There are regions with 100% of their nations in the UN.
FACT: There are regions that require UN membership.
FACT: Not all UN members vote on all UN motions (motions to adopt resolutions or adopt repeals).

OPINION: Just because you are in the UN (which many invader nations are in order to participate in military campaigns) does not make a nation or region "Pro-UN".

OPINION: Just because you vote on most UN motions does not make your nation any different than the 1,000s of other nations that do the same.

FACT: Some of the people that post *draft* proposals here in this forum do so hoping to get honest feedback and do change their proposals based on comments from active UN members.

OPINION: This is helpful, and the more nations that chime in to add the voice to the UN forums will help result in better UN resolutions.

OPINION: Nations and regions that don't make their voices heard are standing on weak moral ground when they complain that a draft proposal that was discussed here did not consider something they object to, especially when those that are complaining rarely post or worse even read the posts here.

The idea behind asking nations to visit the UN isn't to clutter the UN up, but to truely make it a body where diverse viewpoints can be found. Communication needs to be a two-way process in order for the UN to respond to comments and opinions of all its members, and if you'll look at the number of times that the current resolution thread has been viewed, I'm going to guess that it is far less than the 8,000 to 9,000 votes current cast. Even if every UN Delegate were endorsed, that would suggest that there are still some 4,500 voting nations.

By visiting the UN forum and *reading* the debates, sometimes questions about the resolutions are answered.

In the past year UN resolutions have become longer, in part due to the constant complaints over a year ago that "these resolutions are too vague". But still is a need for the forum to be active.

What I've seen some regions do is set up their own UN mirror forums, where they discuss and *archive* UN resolutions. The Pacifics are great examples. What is even more interesting in the Pacifics is that many of the nations posting in those forums have come to the UN and used points raised in those debates here, and some of those nations have taken points raised in the UN forum and brought them back to their regional forum. I'd call that two-way communication, and I've always found most of the Pacifics very easy to communicate with and very clear about what their nations would like to see the UN do.

The region of Ooop North aspires to be pro-UN. Bahgum aims to lead by its glorious example.

The NationStates Region is proud to have such Esteemed Nations such as Mikitivity define what our actions "ought" to be relative to the UN.

We implore him to continue to impose his self-righteous expertise upon our apparent ignorance of his perspectives as each UN Resolution comes to vote.

In fact, we cede our right of self-determination and ask him to tell us how to respond so as not to disturb his serenity.

NOT.

The fact remains that as UN Delegate to the NationStates Region, I vote the will of my region regardless of the whims of non-resident Nations.

Should a non-resident Nation seek to inform us of a particular perspective, We, the Nations of NationStates, shall respectfully allow said Nation to air their position on both our Regional Message Board and our offsite forum.

However, We shall NEVER be strong-armed! Period.

Pro-UN or Not... the fact remains that I currently wield 267 Endorsements in a Region of 311 UN Members. Call us what you will. Define us how you like. Ignore us if you choose. Or not...

We shall vote on each Resolution.

Peace

The Mikes Hope Essence of Mikeswill
UN Delegate
NationStates

As my motto indicates: Love Conquers Fear

I attempt to lighten up:

My singling out Mikitivity for his past regressions shall uni-laterally cease. We believe that his passionate hard work has, on occassion, brought him to react prior to investigation.

The Pro-UN debate is a moot point to the Region I represent. We simply vote on the issues.

Peace

Mikeswill