NationStates Jolt Archive

Greetings.

We are concerned that proposals lacking logical coherence and/or consistency are being passed as resolutions by this august assembly, which thereupon doubles its workload by having to consider repeals of such resolutions.

As an example, we point out with some sadness the wording of the currently ill-phrased 'Dolphin' resolution, up for vote. It specifically enjoins various measures for preserving dolphins and suchlike, and then ends with, "Calls upon all states to prevent dolphin abuse, in any way that they see fit, provided that no dolphin shall ever be preferred over human lives."

The 'shall ever' is immediately voided should even one human dolphin-hunter or dolphin-eater be baulked of his choice of action or path to fulfilment, as that would be the preference of at least one dolphin over at least one human life. Note that no mention of mortality or other measure of a life is provided.

I am inclined to agree to an extent - it would be helpful if nations posted a draft on here before they submitted their proposal. That way we would vet the proposal for such typos (although lets not flame them if we point them out - after all, I'm sure they did not misspell on purpose!)

Secondly it is not that difficult to run a spellcheck.

But I don't think we should overreact and throw our arms in the air in disgust if a nation has not used proper grammar or misspelt a couple of words. After all, not every nation on here has a fully capable english speaker....well, I say speaker, but I mean writer. I'm sure you understand what I mean!

Greetings.

We refrain from throwing our hands, flippers, or other appendages into the air. Yet we must say that it is difficult for a new member of the NSUN to actually understand how the entire body of NSUN resolutions works as a coherent whole. We have tried our best by reading all the resolutions. Some of them are internally inconsistent, some are inconsistent with others.

We do not fault the various members of this august assembly individually or collectively. Rather, we wonder if the process is at fault. The time for debate from the moment a proposal is submitted, to the point at which it becomes a resolution to be passed, and then an official NSUN resolution, might be too short.

[OOC: Perhaps we should resolve that should a resolution be found to be illegal, self-contradictory, or in contravention of a prior and unrepealed resolution, it should automatically be moderator-voided. After all, these can be enough to disqualify a proposal, but apparently don't in some cases. Spelling errors can be corrected provided the incorrect text does not differ significantly in meaning from the corrected text.]

It was tried and judged "illegal". :rolleyes:

It was tried and judged "illegal". :rolleyes:
Exactly how is legislating against complete idiocy and lack of forethought illegal? I'm all for protecting people's rights, but there is no such thing as the right to be stupid.

Exactly how is legislating against complete idiocy and lack of forethought illegal?
For exactly the same reason that legislating pi = 3 is illegal. It might make things run smoother, but you can't pass laws to alter fundamental laws of nature. Apart from the fact that they just don't work, the UN Gnomes won't permit them to come to a vote.

Remember, "Two things are universal: hydrogen and stupidity."

Greetings.

We of Roathin were not attempting to legislate against stupidity, carelessness, or ignorance, such things being fundamental human rights (in the sense that having two ears is a fundamental human right and humans would have cause to feel hard done by if they had but one). We were merely pointing out that there are various factors which militate against the primacy of logical coherence and consistency in the resolutions of this august assembly.

We believe that NSUN delegates ought to be more rigorous in framing and phrasing, defending, as well as prosecuting their proposals. That is all.

Greetings.

We of Roathin were not attempting to legislate against stupidity, carelessness, or ignorance, such things being fundamental human rights (in the sense that having two ears is a fundamental human right and humans would have cause to feel hard done by if they had but one). We were merely pointing out that there are various factors which militate against the primacy of logical coherence and consistency in the resolutions of this august assembly.

We believe that NSUN delegates ought to be more rigorous in framing and phrasing, defending, as well as prosecuting their proposals. That is all.

I completely agree. A lot of the delegates out there are pretty dumb from my experience.

But I have no idea how you could practically do anything about it.

To the esteemed delegate from Roathin:

Booze. It makes it all better. Seriously.

Booze. It makes it all better. Seriously.
Greetings.

We agree. And it all sounds more logical too.

Greetings.

We agree. And it all sounds more logical too.

I propose that we all head to the Stranger's Bar for a drink. Ah...excuse me, I almost forgot...

NOTING the difficulty and frustration caused by errant proposal authors.

SUGGESTS that action needs to be taken that will ameliorate this situation for the esteemed members of this group.

PROPOSES that the members have a drink to effectively ameliorate this situation and enjoy themselves.

That's my proposal. I used big words and a logical progression, so I think it will do.

Bahgum proposes that all proposals are now written on three ply toilet tissue, rather than the usual one. This should give them a greater consistency.....

Bahgum proposes that all proposals are now written on three ply toilet tissue, rather than the usual one. This should give them a greater consistency.....
I've got you beat, my proposal's being drafted of four ply.:D

I've got you beat, my proposal's being drafted of four ply.:D
Ooh, cushiony and soft. :D