NationStates Jolt Archive

Description: The UN shall enact a World Court to oversee international law. This is the best way to deal with world terrorism. This will set an example for would be criminals that the world is watching. In turn this will make for a safer international community.

Approvals: 0

Status: Lacking Support (requires 137 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Mon Nov 1 2004




Who's with me?

No one seemingly.

I think an international court is going to be difficult to organise. How many UN member states are there? How big would the court have to be to ensure fairness? Too big.

I think a world court is an excellent idea and I would be interrested in working with you on it. However there are a few major problems that need to be thought out in order to ensure it works with game mechanics.

In the opinion of our Most Esteemed Leader, the Chief Executive Officer of My Gun Not Yours, the idea of a World Court is laughable at best, and dangerous at the very least.

If you're going to fight terrorism, use a flamethrower. Courts are only good for declaring that good, honest, down to earth people are unknowing criminals. Turn a class of people into criminals by declaration and -- poof - you have more terrorists.

We should instead each keep a close eye on dangerous thoughts like these, and liquidate these people and their families at the first opportunity - do a thorough job, and there will be no terrorism. :sniper:

The People's Republic of Joseon supports the Idea of a world court, and by the same token that all who do not join will be crushed between the millstones of taxation and inflation! Long live Lenin!

I'd support it, if it were worded more thoroughly and had more detail. The concept is good, but you would have to more clearly define the authority and limitations this body has, as well as the way it is structured.

And please give a link to this proposal. I cannot find it in the list.

ill give a vote for it

The people of Domnonia applaud this effort, and will back it through the United Nations.

Unfortunately the mods of this site see it differently and took my proposal down. :mad:

I though this site supported free speech.

No, its just your proposal was in violation of certain parts of the game, rework your proposal and submit it on this board first for review and comments.

this is a bad idea as some nations may pay-off members backhandley for a favroble ruling.

REJECTED!

I though this site supported free speech.
It may seem that way, but it isn't true. The entire site is run, and more importantly funded, by Max Barry. What he says, goes.

That said, there's still an awful lot of things you can do on the site. I would suggest putting proposals up on the forum before submitting it. That way, you can get a lot of suggestions and reviews from the regulars here, as well as from the mods. Always good to know whether what you are doing is legal before you do it.

I don't see how having a World Court is against the rules of the game. It wouldnt single out any one nation.

After all, we have one in the real world.

And the one in the real world usually fails to really get anything done. More importantly, how are you going to enforce this?

I don't see how having a World Court is against the rules of the game. It wouldnt single out any one nation.

After all, we have one in the real world.

But this isn't the real world. It's a game. There are a lot of things that happen in the real world that don't happen here.

Can I suggest going to the technical forum and asking a question - there are a lot of helpful people there who are on the staff of the game and so might be able to explain, and help you reword what you have to allow you to try again.