NationStates Jolt Archive

Bahgum has submitted the following proposal. The action is reachable, no game mechanics involved, merely simple interest from fellow UN members.

The Right to Smile
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Bahgum

Description: It is our belief that all of our illustrious fellow delegates and their people should have the right to a smile now and then, wherever they are, whatever they do, no exceptions, no excuses, and not even the mother in law should be exempt.
As such Bahgum proposes that any and all proposals that are submitted to this hallowed hall, which either:

a) Are nicely written and aim to raise a smile, however frivolous.
or
b) Aim to directly address issues of a general happiness nature.

Should have their merits decided upon by the democratically elected delegates of this UN, and should NOT be summarily dismissed by moderators.

I put it to this hall, that only a few proposals per batch are nicely written but quirky, the moderators will still have the important necessary job of removing offensive or badly written proposals etc and the rest of us may get a smile and enjoy the UN once more, encouraging all to visit more and perhaps debate on a more serious issue once in a while.

Should have their merits decided upon by the democratically elected delegates of this UN, and should NOT be summarily dismissed by moderators.

Doubt they'll listen. This is called a joke proposal, or "Unworthy of the UN's consideration". I'm not a mod, but this will probably be gone very soon.

P.S. - Your poll doesn't exactly help you out there, either.

P.P.S. - Also, submitting the same proposal three times, even a decent one, is asking for deletion.

One of these proposals has been deleted. The other two are still floating around.

Preposterous! An outrage! Calumny! Security: seize this vile reprobate at once!

There must be no fun in the United Nations!

The Goths of Mikitivity find smiling offensive, and certainly feel smiling, like gun ownership, should be regulated. For example, smiling after sex: good, smiling before you start your tax forms ... bad, very very bad.

MetaGame violation.

metagame what? yawn.

Quote "This is called a joke proposal, or "Unworthy of the UN's consideration". I'm not a mod, but this will probably be gone very soon."

That's the whole point, highlighting the sad state of affairs this UN has lurched into.
Sorry if the proposal was submitted more than once, the web gave errors first two times, so I though it hadn't gone through......

Note: See the 'inflatable gandalf act" and the accompanying thread. We all like that one too.....but under current serious police rules it's frowned upon, and one more like that from the proposer will have them thrown out of the UN!

Should have their merits decided upon by the democratically elected delegates of this UN, and should NOT be summarily dismissed by moderators.

Moderators exist outside of the UN. We're a game construct and have no place in UN Proposals, and we never have. Ever since Enodia started regularly policing the UN, referencing Moderators hasn't been allowed.

Quit pretending this is something "new".

Ok so maybe some of us are confused about what moderators do, and maybe some of us dispute the idea that moderators (who can and do delete proposals) cannot be addressed in proposals. The fact is that someone/small group, over the last few months has decided to delete ALL fun proposals, regardless of quality, and that IS new, this wasn't happening when Bahgum joined the UN. There has certainly been a shift in mindset. And that is something Bahgum will not quit highlighting.

OOC:
The Enodian rule sets (which Hack used when drafting the current rules) already made it clear that joke proposals are OK to talk about on the forums, but not OK in the proposal queue.

Enodia might not have deleted joke proposals, but I think that when a proposal is not offensive and shows little support, the decision to not delete it comes from a more "don't sweat the small stuff" attitude that is *necessary* to survive the colossal amount of "junk" that the thousands of NationStates players arre capable of producing on a regular basis. :)

That said, my advice is to just "pretend" your nation still believes that the Right to Smile is universal, and to work on the proposal, but *never* submit it.

IC:
My government believes that smiling is OK, but not under all circumstances. Laughing at a date because she just farted, while funny, is the quickest way into the doghouse, which causes many domestic problems, thus my government is still opposed to the idea of the United Nations passing universal smiling laws and feels that "local" smiling regulations make more practical sense.

Ok so maybe some of us are confused about what moderators do, and maybe some of us dispute the idea that moderators (who can and do delete proposals) cannot be addressed in proposals. The fact is that someone/small group, over the last few months has decided to delete ALL fun proposals, regardless of quality, and that IS new, this wasn't happening when Bahgum joined the UN. There has certainly been a shift in mindset. And that is something Bahgum will not quit highlighting.
Oddly enough, I see this exact same complaint every few months...

Yes, Hack, but Bahgum is hardly a new nation kicking up a stink. They've been around long enough to see how the UN has changed. This isn't a trivial complaint.

I believe Hack's point is that since this sort of thing comes up frequently, it's not really a "new" state of affairs.

Kind of like how people are always complaining that new music is evil and leading kids down a diabolic path. The older generation has been saying that pretty much since music was invented.

As mentioned before, Enodia was responsible for outlawing joke proposals. And mentioning the mods in a proposal was never allowed. Personally, I think he's pissed because it's his proposal this time.

Face it: this is old news. What's he gonna complain about next? That the mods are biased? That they're pro-nazi?

Face it: this is old news. What's he gonna complain about next? That the mods are biased? That they're pro-nazi?

Just a quick OOC note...

The Mods are biased. Every. Single. One.

That does not mean that they will perform Mod actions based on their biases, however.

As to the other question...I seriously doubt that Baghum thinks that the Mods are pro-nazi. The fine and fun-loving chap is simply concerned about the current state of affairs. There's nothing wrong with being concerned and expressing dissatisfaction with a rule as long as he's polite about it.

***

Quite frankly, I think that well-written joke proposals can lighten the exquisite pain of browsing through the proposals list, but I understand that the rules are there for a reason and should be generally observed even if we think they are not such great rules.

I would encourage Baghum to lighten the atmosphere as best he can without breaking a rule. :)

Thanks for those making supportive noises. Bahgum only wishes to politely raise its concerns, and these concerns have been raised by Bahgum before, hence the comments about seeing this every few months (sorry)! Bahgum will not give up and fully intends to bring this issue up every few months :) The situation has got worse over the last year, despite our efforts. It might be old news, but it's still also current news. The fact that more nations are agreeing with Bahgum underlines this.

Bahgum hopes to lighten the mood as best we can, however if we could just have the teensy little compromise that we are looking for, then we could actually have more fun without breaking rules. We understand the rules are there to stop tonnes of dross, but perhaps a little discretion here and there? For example the recent inflatable gandalf act (nothing to do with Bahgum) was superb, yet breaks the rules. I don't believe all mods are nazi's, so exercising some restraint on the rules shouldn't be that soul destroying, surely?

Bahgum will always aim to be polite in raising objections no matter how strongly we feel. We do however, find it incredibly rude that someone has added an extra question to our poll without asking Bahgum's permission, or even editing that it was not an addition of the original author. An apology would be in order.

We do however, find it incredibly rude that someone has added an extra question to our poll without asking Bahgum's permission. An apology would be in order. Bahgum has been nothing if not polite, in raising a legitimate concern. We do not wish to descend to the same petty level as whoever feels fit to mock one's concerns.
Perhaps the perpetrator is one of those interfering mothers-in-law?

You never know...they are all seeing!!!

hmmmm a 16 to 7 majority.....maybe not all UN delegates, but interesting as a pointer perhaps?

hmmmm a 16 to 7 majority.....maybe not all UN delegates, but interesting as a pointer perhaps?

A number of the votes on *both* sides are from some elder states. My suggestion is to create a *second* poll asking players how far they feel joke proposals should be allowed to go. For example, I'm willing to bet that players like Flib and Goober aren't about to support something like the "Hippos" resolutions from Dec. 2003.

My point, those 16 nations in favour might not really be wishing to hand over a "loaded gun" to the moderators.

By the same logic, players like Hersfold and myself have long advocated that the UN should be fun ... so it isn't like we are against humour. :)

For example, I'm willing to bet that players like Flib and Goober aren't about to support something like the "Hippos" resolutions from Dec. 2003.
After reading those resolutions on the NSWiki I must say that I probably wouldn't have supported them, however I actually would like to see some humor in the UN, in fact I actually endorsed the Inflatable Gandalf Act even knowing that it would be deemed illegal.

One thing to remember here. If your joke proposals pass, then they directly effect our countries.

Personally, I wouldn't mind a humorously worded, well thought out proposal. However, the majority of the proposals that I see are jokes to begin with. Seriously, the amount of people of think of their countries as a mere state is staggering. Most proposals deal with items that are better left to national control.

Joke proposals passing is very rare, Bahgum certainly never expects any of its proposals to pass, but is pleased to provoke debate in a fun way.

As the poll is in favour of more fun, would the keepers of the rules, and those who delete proposals care to take up the challenge of a compromise: allow well written funny proposals to stay?

As this is meant to be a simulation of a real UN, I disagree with the majority who have voted so far. Joke proposals, while fun to read, would not pass or even make it to the floor in a real-life UN situation; so why should they be considered here?

I like the furious debates and arguments put forth about proposals, but only on situations of a serious nature (serious being defined here as "something that could happen if our nations and the NSUN were real").

[QUOTE=Sparren]As this is meant to be a simulation of a real UN, I disagree with the majority who have voted so far. Joke proposals, while fun to read, would not pass or even make it to the floor in a real-life UN situation; so why should they be considered here?


Maybe because it's not real life?

Ok, there is a way to make proposals funny, but have serious topics. The best way is to come up with a stupid anagram that, without the meaning of the anagram, it would make no sence.

For example, i went to a mock United Nations called SOMA and we had a resolution for indigenous people of the Chiapas in Mexico. There were two clauses that lit up the room;

3. Asks that a...program Thorough Aid for Chiapas (TACO) be established...

4. Further asks that the Mexican government fund TACO...

We had a great time getting Mexico to fund TACO...they didn't want to

My point being that if you do something a little funny like that , then it creates a bit of humour in the resolution, while keeping it serious. It may not seem funny now, but when your having a bad day, it helps :D

When i first became a Delegate and plied my trade in the proposals areas and threads i was a died in the wool harrumph harrumph stick, viewing "Joke" proposals as a Waste of time.
Then the Tedium and Bordom of endless Serious proposals made me wish there were a few funny proposals thrown in for good measure. By this i dont mean the Right to arm bears, etc. Proposals like the Inflatable gandalf would be nice to see.

Fact is the NSUN has become more like a job and if it were not for the odd smile in such threads as the Strangers Bar, I would have left the UN forum ages ago.

I have a Job thanks, I dont need a second one. Please let us allow for some good Honest Fun.

As this is meant to be a simulation of a real UN, I disagree with the majority who have voted so far. Joke proposals, while fun to read, would not pass or even make it to the floor in a real-life UN situation; so why should they be considered here?


Maybe because it's not real life?

All right then... I say we create a separate forum who don't take politics seriously. I might sound stiff, but I really want to discuss politics in a serious way, because it teaches me more about real life without harming anyone.

Ok, there is a way to make proposals funny, but have serious topics. The best way is to come up with a stupid anagram that, without the meaning of the anagram, it would make no sence.

For example, i went to a mock United Nations called SOMA and we had a resolution for indigenous people of the Chiapas in Mexico. There were two clauses that lit up the room;

3. Asks that a...program Thorough Aid for Chiapas (TACO) be established...

4. Further asks that the Mexican government fund TACO...

We had a great time getting Mexico to fund TACO...they didn't want to

My point being that if you do something a little funny like that , then it creates a bit of humour in the resolution, while keeping it serious. It may not seem funny now, but when your having a bad day, it helps :D
Actually I've been toying with a similar idea for the title of the proposal (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=423922) I'm currently drafting.

All right then... I say we create a separate forum who don't take politics seriously. I might sound stiff, but I really want to discuss politics in a serious way, because it teaches me more about real life without harming anyone.

no, no, no, surely there is room for all of us? Bahgum accepts that most of the stuff here is serious anyhow and should continue, just a little fun, at the edges is all we are looking for. The currrent over-serious attitude takes the shine off the place, that is all. Sometime, us less serious types do comment on the big serious issues you know...or help put it into perspective, I say the UN benefits from keeping us slightly happy!!

Note: Again? If I had a dime for every time someone complains about this...

Bahgum did not put this question on the poll, and no-one has asked our permission to do so.

If asked we would have agreed to include it, especially as it looks like a serious type has a glimmer of a sense of humour.
However we weren't and can only assume that someone has misused their moderator power. Such behaviour is unnacceptable from one in a postion of trust.