NationStates Jolt Archive

A resolution to ensure nature's sustainability and avoid irreparable damage by establishing a global operating supervising scientist team. Sustainability means that nature is not decreased from the state of today, but to keep nature in the wideness it now is.

Dear Delegates, Dear UN Members,
most people are affected by nature in various ways. Once existed within nature, now the time has come for human beings to give something back to her.

The resolution would consist out of the following points:

§1 All potentially ecologically harmful utilisations of tropical rainforest resources are assessed by a team of expert and impartial scientists (Commission to ensure sustainability [from now on: C.E.S]) to ensure that they are ecologically sustainable before proceeding. If simple replanting of trees(#resolution 24) doesn't ensure sustainability, the C.E.S. may prohibit utilisations.

§2 The C.E.S. will also do random checks on different companies and private people from time to time to control whether they stick to the passed resolutions #24 and #49.

§3 Every UN member state will have to pay a fixed amount of money, depending on the nation’s state of population and industry. This is the way the C.E.S. will be financed.

Please note that this resolution is a supporting one. It refers to passed resolutions #24 and #49, which say that rainforest destruction should be stopped and that people have to replant trees they are cutting down. This proposal is about establishing a commission to ENSURE that people stick to these resolutions, because until today, nobody controls that.



...
please support my proposal, thx

Please note that this resolution is a supporting one. It refers to passed resolutions #24 and #49, which say that rainforest destruction should be stopped and that people have to replant trees they are cutting down. This proposal is about establishing a commission to ENSURE that people stick to these resolutions, because until today, nobody controls that.


OOC: Unlike the real world where a country can ignore UN resolutions, NationStates has no option. If you are a part of the UN, than you are following the resolutions the NationState's UN has put in place.

A resolution to ensure nature's sustainability and avoid irreparable damage by establishing a global operating supervising scientist team. Sustainability means that nature is not decreased from the state of today, but to keep nature in the wideness it now is.

Uh, no. My nation is mostly wilderness and needs to clear it as it expands. The portions cleared are not going to affect the climate drastically anyway.

Dear Delegates, Dear UN Members,
most people are affected by nature in various ways. Once existed within nature, now the time has come for human beings to give something back to her.

The resolution would consist out of the following points:

§1 All potentially ecologically harmful utilisations of tropical rainforest resources are assessed by a team of expert and impartial scientists (Commission to ensure sustainability [from now on: C.E.S]) to ensure that they are ecologically sustainable before proceeding. If simple replanting of trees(#resolution 24) doesn't ensure sustainability, the C.E.S. may prohibit utilisations.

How does this affect the planet I own that is mostly rainforests or forests when it comes to land?

§2 The C.E.S. will also do random checks on different companies and private people from time to time to control whether they stick to the passed resolutions #24 and #49.

You don't have the option of disobeying those. Besides, my corporations are heavily armed, tend to frown on inspections from people they have yet to authenticate, and find the trespassing laws that allow the deaths of trespassers very convenient.

§3 Every UN member state will have to pay a fixed amount of money, depending on the nation’s state of population and industry. This is the way the C.E.S. will be financed.

If I wanted to pay a bunch of people to tell me how to deal with rainforests, I'd hire a panel of environmentalists.

Please note that this resolution is a supporting one. It refers to passed resolutions #24 and #49, which say that rainforest destruction should be stopped and that people have to replant trees they are cutting down. This proposal is about establishing a commission to ENSURE that people stick to these resolutions, because until today, nobody controls that.

The UN Gnomes control it. And they bite hard when you try to resist.

...
please support my proposal, thx

No.

It's a good idea, but we could construct a much better working paper/draft resolution. If you want to work on one contact me.

Uh, no. My nation is mostly wilderness and needs to clear it as it expands. The portions cleared are not going to affect the climate drastically anyway.



How does this affect the planet I own that is mostly rainforests or forests when it comes to land?



You don't have the option of disobeying those. Besides, my corporations are heavily armed, tend to frown on inspections from people they have yet to authenticate, and find the trespassing laws that allow the deaths of trespassers very convenient.



If I wanted to pay a bunch of people to tell me how to deal with rainforests, I'd hire a panel of environmentalists.



The UN Gnomes control it. And they bite hard when you try to resist.



No.
I won't answer such a stupid post. I made the mistake and tried to argue the last time. I now have proof that you unfortunatley seem to like to destroy proposals by inventing ridicolous things like UN gnomes...come on thats just...rofl.
But it's the same scheme as last time you answered one of my proposals. I changed it so much that I thought it won't affect you and you can't destroy it by inventing, quote "on my planet, there are enough rainforests, and poor people don't live near there, how should they get there" "I have rainforest in little glasses, do you want some?" and so on and so on and so on and so on.
So, I'm going to ignore you. stfu, this is no useful critique but dumb

I won't answer such a stupid post. I made the mistake and tried to argue the last time. I now have proof that you unfortunatley seem to like to destroy proposals by inventing ridicolous things like UN gnomes...come on thats just...rofl.
But it's the same scheme as last time you answered one of my proposals. I changed it so much that I thought it won't affect you and you can't destroy it by inventing, quote "on my planet, there are enough rainforests, and poor people don't live near there, how should they get there" "I have rainforest in little glasses, do you want some?" and so on and so on and so on and so on.
So, I'm going to ignore you. stfu, this is no useful critique but dumb
See, DLE brings up a good point. Not all nations are the same.

And the UN gnomes exist.

Giordano,
Acting Senior UN representative,
The Black New World,
Delegate to The Order of The Valiant States

Uh, no. My nation is mostly wilderness and needs to clear it as it expands. The portions cleared are not going to affect the climate drastically anyway.

Thus the emphasis on environmental sustainability.

How does this affect the planet I own that is mostly rainforests or forests when it comes to land?

obviously it doesn't. The keyword would be environmental sustainability.

You don't have the option of disobeying those. Besides, my corporations are heavily armed, tend to frown on inspections from people they have yet to authenticate, and find the trespassing laws that allow the deaths of trespassers very convenient.

Since you don't have the option of disobeying said resolutions regarding tree planting and the protection of rainforests, you're corporations are way out of line calling enforcers of said law trespassers.

If I wanted to pay a bunch of people to tell me how to deal with rainforests, I'd hire a panel of environmentalists.

But you did join the UN. And they already tell you how to deal with the rainforests.

The UN Gnomes control it. And they bite hard when you try to resist.

Ah the wonderful UN gnomes.

Btw, XelNaga? The UN gnomes are mentioned in the FAQ somewhere i think.

now, if someone would only make me a delegate :P

now, if someone would only make me a delegate :P

I have some sticky-backed plastic, some sellotape and an egg-cup. Will that be enough to make you a delegate?

(sorry :})

I have some sticky-backed plastic, some sellotape and an egg-cup. Will that be enough to make you a delegate?

(sorry :})

not unless you used it on yourself :P

(jokes)

I won't answer such a stupid post. I made the mistake and tried to argue the last time. I now have proof that you unfortunatley seem to like to destroy proposals by inventing ridicolous things like UN gnomes...come on thats just...rofl.

Do a search on UN Gnomes. I'm not the one who made them up. In fact, they've posted on here before.

It may be silly, but remember this is NS and, if it can have a nation of sentient penguines, having little gnomes that magically override your laws is not out of the realm of possibility.

But it's the same scheme as last time you answered one of my proposals. I changed it so much that I thought it won't affect you and you can't destroy it by inventing, quote "on my planet, there are enough rainforests, and poor people don't live near there, how should they get there" "I have rainforest in little glasses, do you want some?" and so on and so on and so on and so on.

Actually, the planet is real and in my RP history. The one that is entirely rainforests is Terrasot, which is not inhabitted yet. The one on which people live near rainforests is Terrator. The following posts detail when, ICly, I discovered them.

Terrasot: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=382834&highlight=Terrasot

Terrator: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=367691&highlight=Terrator

Do a search on Terrator and you'll find I mention it quite a bit. Also, quite a bit of information about it is in my factbook, the link to which is in my sig.

And I did not say I had rainforests in little glasses, but that I had enough rainforests to give them away.

Finally, note what I said about the distance between the cities on Terrator and the rainforests. It's common sense that they wouldn't transverse all of that space just to live in wilderness.

So, I'm going to ignore you. stfu, this is no useful critique but dumb

You're ignoring a critique just because someone uses it to point out how their nation is different?

If you are going to deal with the environment, you must remember that not all nations are the same. Just take a look at the wide range of differences among the regulars. Until you are willing to accept that nations will present something you have not prepared for, including using it multiple times (note my consistancy in what I bring up), then you will continue to fail in taking in account for the variety of differences among the UN and continue to create proposals with limited scope that are, frankly, not worth our time without revision.

Thus the emphasis on environmental sustainability.

Sustainability is one thing. Keeping it exactly the same is another.

obviously it doesn't. The keyword would be environmental sustainability.

Actually, it could. Thet could attempt to prevent me from clearcutting unneccessary rainforests to make room for settlements.

Since you don't have the option of disobeying said resolutions regarding tree planting and the protection of rainforests, you're corporations are way out of line calling enforcers of said law trespassers.

It says they are allowed to do inspections. It doesn't say they have to live long enough to report the results. Or leave the building, for that matter. Besides, officially they would be. DLE laws on the subject require verification of a person having qualifications to enter an area, and that would mean they cannot do surprise inspections without breaking DLE law and the corporations enjoying the freedom to shoot them on sight.

But you did join the UN. And they already tell you how to deal with the rainforests.

Uh, the majority of the DLE Empire, including the portion that actually makes the laws, is outside the UN. Only one nation per IP is allowed in, and in my case that nation happens to be a nonruling territory.

It says they are allowed to do inspections. It doesn't say they have to live long enough to report the results. Or leave the building, for that matter. Besides, officially they would be. DLE laws on the subject require verification of a person having qualifications to enter an area, and that would mean they cannot do surprise inspections without breaking DLE law and the corporations enjoying the freedom to shoot them on sight.

Unfortunately, DLE laws would be moot on this point. UN resolutions overrule a nations laws (refer to thread - "Delegates! Protect your constitutions!", post by game mod who deleted the proposal)


Uh, the majority of the DLE Empire, including the portion that actually makes the laws, is outside the UN. Only one nation per IP is allowed in, and in my case that nation happens to be a nonruling territory.

in which case, what's your beef? :P

Unfortunately, DLE laws would be moot on this point. UN resolutions overrule a nations laws (refer to thread - "Delegates! Protect your constitutions!", post by game mod who deleted the proposal)

I see no UN resolution that says I cannot kill them after they are done with the inspection and before they can make a report about it. The UN doesn't explicitely protect life and national laws on this issue allow a certain lethality. The UN has no legal standing is trying to challenge me about it.

in which case, what's your beef? :P

The fact one member is and I like to go along with them (with certain exceptions...)

I see no UN resolution that says I cannot kill them after they are done with the inspection and before they can make a report about it. The UN doesn't explicitely protect life and national laws on this issue allow a certain lethality. The UN has no legal standing is trying to challenge me about it.

Aren't loopholes great :P Xelnaga, you might want to edit your proposal giving them police powers to some extent then.

The fact one member is and I like to go along with them (with certain exceptions...)

I'm all confused now.... oh well. Carry on :)

Aren't loopholes great :P Xelnaga, you might want to edit your proposal giving them police powers to some extent then.

Then they become a hostile military force and are dealt with by the military, who won't hesitate to not only kill them but track down their nations and release weapons of mass destruction on those as well. And I use a few the UN has no defense against.

Then they become a hostile military force and are dealt with by the military, who won't hesitate to not only kill them but track down their nations and release weapons of mass destruction on those as well. And I use a few the UN has no defense against.

And you were the one berating the guy for wanting to let countries allow their constitutions overrule UN resolutions.

So basically you just accept the ones that you like, and reject the ones you don't. I see :P

And you were the one berating the guy for wanting to let countries allow their constitutions overrule UN resolutions.

So basically you just accept the ones that you like, and reject the ones you don't. I see :P

I was berating the guy for it due to the fact it's illegal. Keep in mind the DLE territory in the UN still has to abide by all UN laws, since it is technically classified as a nation and is a member. This is due to a weird bit of history involving that nation and DLE.

Nature sucks. When was the last time you went out in it?

Asshelmetta does NOT support this proposal.

Nature sucks.
Air blows.
Soil swallows.

Circle of life.

I won't answer such a stupid post. I made the mistake and tried to argue the last time. I now have proof that you unfortunatley seem to like to destroy proposals by inventing ridicolous things like UN gnomes...come on thats just...rofl.

You talkin' smack about me?

So, I'm going to ignore you. stfu, this is no useful critique but dumb
Flaming's bad, yo.

argh, guys take it easy.
Do you really want proposals which mention every single option possible, including all possilbe wcs and things? and a proposal about nature which mentions that supervisers are not to be shot when they leave buildings??? Helloho?
THAT'S what i meant by inventing stupid things...there may be a planet full of rainforest, there may be UN gnomes(I still doubt it), there may be different planets.
BUT (the big but) I see proposals as guidelines, not as things I look into if i don't know what to do ("Let's just ask the allmighty proposal, it will know best...")
I have seen NOT ONE proposal which was that detailed. Just imagine the global library thing. It didn't say where it should be established(or where the servers should be). It didn't say how much information on whcih topic will be available. It didn't say who's the janitor. bah bah bah
This is what sucks for me. Invent things, but don not expect proposals to be as long as books...use your fantasy here, it seems to work in other sectors very well...

Just one more thing:
I like the idea of fantasy nations, if you'd like there can be walking rain forests or things...the thing that makes me angry is that some people expect tooooooooooo detailed proposals

argh, guys take it easy.
Do you really want proposals which mention every single option possible, including all possilbe wcs and things? and a proposal about nature which mentions that supervisers are not to be shot when they leave buildings??? Helloho?

Actually, a vague proposal is better. It can cover all nations at once. One of the problems with this is the fact one of the details of it creates a question in my mind about it. My question about the planet is a case of me wondering how it will affect me, not a case of me trying to argue against that point.

And, to be honest, I find this does directly disadvantage me, whether my nation is on Earth or some star you won't even see the death of for nearly 2000 years. My nation is mostly wilderness, and this prevents me from expanding as needed. There are several Earth nations that are the same way.

And the inspectors being shot has to do more with me taking advantage of a loophole and ignoring certain technological problems with them trying to pull surprise inspections anyway.

THAT'S what i meant by inventing stupid things...there may be a planet full of rainforest, there may be UN gnomes(I still doubt it), there may be different planets.

The UN Gnomes are real, and have posted on this thread. They are an alt of one of the mods. Be careful when talking about them.

Oh, automated defenses don't work against them anymore. Don't ask.

BUT (the big but) I see proposals as guidelines, not as things I look into if i don't know what to do ("Let's just ask the allmighty proposal, it will know best...")

The proposals are intended as laws, not as guidelines. Sometimes, they are written to act as guidelines. But mostly, you must obey them. That is the way the system was set up.

I have seen NOT ONE proposal which was that detailed. Just imagine the global library thing. It didn't say where it should be established(or where the servers should be). It didn't say how much information on whcih topic will be available. It didn't say who's the janitor. bah bah bah

It also was complained about by me because it is technologically unfeasible by nations using modern technology.

This is what sucks for me. Invent things, but don not expect proposals to be as long as books...use your fantasy here, it seems to work in other sectors very well...

It is not a lack of details, but the details you included that are the problem.

Actually, a vague proposal is better. It can cover all nations at once. One of the problems with this is the fact one of the details of it creates a question in my mind about it. My question about the planet is a case of me wondering how it will affect me, not a case of me trying to argue against that point.

Contradictory.

First you say that a vague proposal is better, than you say that you are taking advantage of loopholes.

Keep in mind that it is vague proposals that allow loopholes in the first place.

Why do you think that laws will go on and on covering every detail and closing all loopholes in one sentence?

Obviously, it is impossible to accommodate (sp?) for everyone in a law that impacts 30k countries... but one can do one's best in an attempt to at least meet the minimum of most people's needs.

But the title of the proposal is about environmental sustainability. If your rainforest reproprogates itself faster than you can cut it down... well you obviously have no problems sustaining your natural environment now do you? :P

And nature is awesome. It's the urban centres and all its polluting by-products that suck (I admit, I am a hypocrite for I enjoy the amenities of large urban centres just as much as I enjoy nature.)

Contradictory.

First you say that a vague proposal is better, than you say that you are taking advantage of loopholes.

Keep in mind that it is vague proposals that allow loopholes in the first place.

Why do you think that laws will go on and on covering every detail and closing all loopholes in one sentence?

Obviously, it is impossible to accommodate (sp?) for everyone in a law that impacts 30k countries... but one can do one's best in an attempt to at least meet the minimum of most people's needs.

You can't get specific without starting to exclude nations. You can be specific and vague at the same time, though. It's a balancing act.

And everything has loopholes.

But the title of the proposal is about environmental sustainability. If your rainforest reproprogates itself faster than you can cut it down... well you obviously have no problems sustaining your natural environment now do you? :P

Normal propogation rate. I just have planets with huge amounts of rainforest. And removing large portions of them won't have that much of an environmental affect.