NationStates Jolt Archive

I have come to the conclusion after the failure of this panel to even convene by electing a chair, that under the current rules The Pretenema Panel is unworkable.

With regret I motion the current panel be disbanded and no further panels be set untill the rules are reworked so as to improove expediency and practicality.

I suggest we begin a disscusion immediatly. I believe a Panel of 15 to be unworkable. I apologise to all those who have given TPP the oppertunity to proove its worth and i believe TPP 002 did just that. However the delays with that panel were also painfully evident.

I, Prince Esheram Byron, Pledge my support to a Pretenema panel that will actively deter and stop genocide and where it was not possible to do so, find and take out the governments and individuals who believe murder of the innocents is an acceptable step. This is not that Panel.

Esheram Byron,
Panel Member for the Realm of Hibernia.

Its time to take out the trash with this organis(z)ation and get a working panel in place. I propose we start by repealing Both associated resolutions and by then instigating a working solution which we can put forward to the Delegates for approoval and ratification by the general assembly. TPP has been given its oppertunity and there are too many faults in its make up.

Ladies, Gentlemen, Races of no gender of these UN Forum's. Lets make this work.

Esheram Byron.

Wait, weren't you one of those playing the gong of "The Pretenama Panel must survive!"? Just checking my notes here...

Repeal "The Eon Convention on Genocide"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution


Category: Repeal
Resolution: #83
Proposed by: Venerable libertarians

Description: UN Resolution #83: The Eon Convention on Genocide (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: Given the Failures of the Pretenema Panel to effect a functioning body to expedite the requirements of this resolution, I propose we repeal this Resolution so that it may be replaced with a single Resolution that provides a working solution that can be applied to Investigating and stopping genocide with the haste nessesary.


Approvals: 1 (Venerable libertarians)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 147 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Thu Jun 23 2005

The Hibernian Kingdom of Venerable libertarians has approved this proposal. [Withdraw Approval]



Repeal "Humanitarian Intervention"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution


Category: Repeal
Resolution: #92
Proposed by: Venerable libertarians

Description: UN Resolution #92: Humanitarian Intervention (Category: Human Rights; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: Given the Failures of the Pretenema Panel to effect a functioning body to expedite the requirements of this resolution, I propose we repeal this Resolution, in conjunction with a repeal of the Eon convention on Genocide Resolution, so that it may be replaced with a single Resolution that provides a working solution that can be applied to Investigating and stopping genocide with the alacrity nessesary.

Approvals: 1 (Venerable libertarians)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 147 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Thu Jun 23 2005

The Hibernian Kingdom of Venerable libertarians has approved this proposal. [Withdraw Approval]



I ask all delegates to approve the repeals and in the mean time any suggestions would be gratefully acknowledged so we may have a single bullet proof resolution to replace the current unworkable resolutions which have over the past few months caused so much controversary.

Just a few thoughts here:

First, what was wrong with the text of Krioval's repeal, which got over 90 approvals? Granted, it died in part due to the flood of resolutions that reached quorum at the time, and considering the sheer level of animosity the proposal was gaining, it was decided to let it expire rather than risk an anti-telegram campaign while it sat on the queue for nine days.

Second, what's wrong with EON? It makes the Pretenama Panel the only organization to deal with genocide at the level of trying individuals in a neutral setting. I see no reason to repeal that resolution in that TPP has never been attempted toward such an endeavor, at least not one that has gained major international attention (OOC: one that's been RP'd).

Third, Krioval still sees no reason why the UN should be involved in specifically military affairs at all. Leave that to the greater international community and let TPP exist to prosecute individuals.

Ambassador Yuri Sokolev
Director Koro Vartek
Armed Republic of Krioval

Okay, Krioval, here's a few reasons as to why the panel is a failure and why all parts of it should be removed.

1. The TPP itself is pathetically weak. Its members consist of only two nations that can even attempt to take on mine in its current incarnation, and that's assuming I only send a frigate and don't bother with a gunship or a destroyer. The panel is completely incapable of dealing with FT nations.

2. The only time the TPP has managed to declare war on somebody, the result was the TPP basically having its ass handed to it due to internal fuckups and the fact the enemy it was facing was big enough to take on the entire group, save for the one FT nation, and come out winning.

3. The Eon Convention itself is currently illegal. In fact, it's the exact reason why the campaign to have committees banned happened and why committees are now limited to NPCs only.

4. The Humanitarian Intervention resolution is both an amendment and a resolution that, in its wording, extends the will of the UN over nonmember nations. The day it was proposed it was illegal, and it's only gotten even more so since then.

5. The TPP lacks support, recognition, or even the basics of respect from quite a few UN members and pretty much everyone outside of the UN. It has no power over others as a result and any attempts to operate will likely result in many of the members being conquered or exterminated by an international force.

6. The TPP is currently operating under threat of extermination if it interferes with certain nations, some of which are UN members. After all, they can't charge for the genocide if they were the victims of it. The lack of nation size within the TPP itself also helps make this a credible threat.

7. The first panel attempted ended up being aborted due to lack of members.

8. The TPP has lost several members recently, one of which has gone from being a member to refusing to recognize its authority.

9. Unfortunately for the TPP, many of the people it should target are either too big or are friends with nations that are too big. Ignoring alliances, of course. The TPP can't operate well if it strikes against one nation and recieves attacks from twenty others in response.

10. The panel is showing signs of falling apart already, due to the failed military action of their first case and the utter failure of even elected a chairperson in their second.

Krioval, remember that, during the vote on the TPP, I did end up supporting it, but I supported it with reservations. Those reservations have come true. The TPP is operating illegally under UN rules and has proven completely ineffective at doing its job. It's time we remove this waste of space from the UN to make room for efforts that will succeed.

Thanks for the "reminder" about why I proposed to repeal it originally. My memory is, however, a bit stronger than that. What I am proposing is that EON be left intact, as it isn't really a problematic resolution by itself, Humanitarian Intervention be killed, and life continue much as it has in the past few months. I'd prefer if my original repeal proposal were used, seeing as how I wrote it up so recently, but at the end of the day, it's not crucial. As to the military and technology of DLE, I can wank FT all I want myself. Some people are always going to be out-of-range for military interventions by 90+% of NS countries - it doesn't automatically preclude some aspects of the UN from continuing much as they do normally. Honestly, while I don't expect otherwise from your nation, it might be occasionally nice to realize that the vast majority of nations in NS aren't as technologically advanced as are we.

In conclusion, repeal #92 and leave #83. It makes fewer messes overall, at least as far as I can see. Pushing both simultaneously will likely impede the passage of either.

Thanks for the "reminder" about why I proposed to repeal it originally. My memory is, however, a bit stronger than that. What I am proposing is that EON be left intact, as it isn't really a problematic resolution by itself, Humanitarian Intervention be killed, and life continue much as it has in the past few months.

Unfortunately, Eon can no longer be allowed to be left intact. As long as the resolution was technically legal, it had good points to it. The current problem is that it is illegal for UN committees to be staffed by nations. As such, the resolution is now illegal.

I'd prefer if my original repeal proposal were used, seeing as how I wrote it up so recently, but at the end of the day, it's not crucial.

I'd also prefer that one. We can at least get one illegal resolution off the books.

As to the military and technology of DLE, I can wank FT all I want myself. Some people are always going to be out-of-range for military interventions by 90+% of NS countries - it doesn't automatically preclude some aspects of the UN from continuing much as they do normally. Honestly, while I don't expect otherwise from your nation, it might be occasionally nice to realize that the vast majority of nations in NS aren't as technologically advanced as are we.

However, those nations that are not as advanced are not my concern. They can't bomb you from orbit while shrugging off every nuke you fire at them. They're also far more likely to get away with genocide, since the TPP cannot do anything about them without facing space fleets of entire alliances. And if my alliance calls and it's between them and the TPP, you can bet where my ships are going.

The other problem you are ignoring is one I brought up: Size. The TPP's first actual case involved a nation that was MT and yet was still big enough to own the entire group on an equal field of battle.

Besides, you should look at how scattered my nation is before you think I'm going to be sending large fleets anywhere. I have a problem of being scattered far beyond what any other nation can achieve.

In conclusion, repeal #92 and leave #83. It makes fewer messes overall, at least as far as I can see. Pushing both simultaneously will likely impede the passage of either.

Then don't push both simultaneously. Push the most illegal one, then wait a couple months and kill the Eon Convention. Once both are removed, we are in position to potentially lay down the groundwork for a better group that does the same job.

OOC:

Last I checked, the only requirement on committees was that they weren't allowed to be created unless they could be construed as existing only in the abstract. That doesn't preclude people from RPing committees - it just can't be a requirement that the committee be RP'd for it to be part of a resolution.

The tech issue is a side issue, though I try to remember that most people are playing solid MT; proposals are bound to reflect this to a great degree, and I don't like gutting someone's proposal because I could choose to interpret it in a way that makes Krioval immune (unless I don't like the proposer or the wording of the proposal - then I feel I have free reign - go latent hypocrisy!).

I don't see the pressing need to be rid of EON, which may put me solidly in the minority, and in any case, it's not exactly a make-or-break deal for Krioval (IC) or me (OOC) to see it gone. From both IC and OOC perspective, I see no reason whatsoever to replace the military intervention aspect of TPP with a UN resolution. I don't want the UN involved in military actions, especially since the creation of an army is expressly forbidden. It thus seems very silly to find "workarounds" that make "temporary UN armies" at will - that seems a dangerous precedent, and I'm willing to bet that the mods would quash it before long, leaving us in the messy state of having older resolutions allowing certain actions that newer resolutions may not authorize.

In short, I'll push for the repeal of HI (#92). The text of my original repeal, along with both HI and EON (#83), can be found here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=415869). When it comes to voiding EON, my support wanes, and when it comes to replacing TPP with yet another committee/organization, it evaporates entirely (or even turns to opposition).

DLE, while EON may be illegal if it was submitted now, that does not make it illegal as a passed resolution. It was passed under different rules. If resolutions were removed following changes of rules, then RBH Replacement wouldn't have survived Enodia's modding.

OOC: Nope. The ban on committees specifically bans the idea of nations being on committees, stating they must be abstract only. You can RP one, but no resolution may establish one and in its wording have it chaired by nations. The TPP in particular is what led to that ban, due to the Humanitarian Intervention proposal and my resulting campaign to ban committees.

The tech issue is a big one with the TPP because of a slight problem with it trying to enforce its rulings on nations that may be hundreds or thousands of lightyears away, or even in other galaxies, other planes of existance, alternate timelines, or even at a different point in time itself. For most, such as the ban on chemical weapons, technology doesn't matter as much as how easily you can exploit the wording itself. Hell, I'm still using chemical weapons due to that reason.

Eon is something I want to be gotten rid of in order to remove the clutter of illegal and worthless resolutions. Plus, removing it weakens the case for further international courts.

As for replacing it: Maybe, maybe not. If enough support cannot be had for replacing it in about a week, then I won't bother supporting such a campaign.

DLE, while EON may be illegal if it was submitted now, that does not make it illegal as a passed resolution. It was passed under different rules. If resolutions were removed following changes of rules, then RBH Replacement wouldn't have survived Enodia's modding.

Obviously not bothered to check out the NSWiki timeline.

http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/UN_Timeline

The following resolutions were removed for rules changes that happened after they passed, or later removed for rules violations:

Removed for mechanics reasons: Proposal limits Jan 26 2003
Removed for mechanics reasons: Search Function Jan 30 2003
Removed for mechanics reasons: Secretary General Feb 6 2003
Removed for mechanics reasons: Resolution 245A Proper Grammar Feb 15 2003
Removed for mechanics reasons: Knowledge of Own Country Feb 19 2003
Removed for mechanics reasons: Reduction of Needed Approvals Mar 4 2003
Removed for mechanics reasons: Resolution Restrictions Apr 8 2003
Removed for mechanics reasons: International Space Initiative (ISI) Oct 3 2003
Removed: - HIPPOS ARE BIG - removed Dec 02 2003
Removed for mechanics reasons: Freedom From SPAM Act Jan 15 2004
Removed for mechanics reasons: Olympic Games Aug 28 2004

The early ones were removed for game mechanics violations, which were a set of rules passed after they were passed. I didn't grab the full list for a reason.

Keep in mind that, at the time most of those were passed, Barry's FAQ really wasn't a set of rules for proposals. It was pretty much not given that much attention. After Enodia got involved, the first set of rules were drafted and the resolutions considered the biggest violations were removed. Why they didn't get to all resolutions violating the rules I don't know, but as it stands they managed to remove several for violating rules that dodn't exist at the time they were passed.

Oh, one other interesting fact: Hack and a couple other mods, as well as a few posters (including myself), tried several times to get RBH removed, as well as certain other duplicate resolutions.

I can see the reasons behind the reaction of Krioval regarding keeping the eon Resolution. However I am of the opinion that both resolutions are inextricably linked and the requirement for a single workable resolution is better to leaving the existing flawed ones.
As to vastiva's reaction to the fact that it is My nation that calls for the repeals in the first place after my efforts to defend the panel, I can understand the surprise. However i am not unreasonable nor am i blind to the many gaping inefficiencies of the Pretenema Panel.
I had hoped that the Problems effecting the Panel as a working group would have ironed themselves out but unfortunately these problems have gotten worse, to the point that just securing the 15 members for the panel to elect a chair has become an unbearably long process complicated with trivialities.
To my mind DLE's early post in reply to Krioval is also my opinion. I could not have listed the points for reform with any greater clarity than those.

The way forward is simple. Repeal both resolutions and then work together to put in place a working solution so we may effectively investigate and resolve issues of Genocide and severe human rights abuses.
I Appeal to all concerned to put aside past differences and to treat each other and each others ideas in regard to this matter, with respect.

While the Admins have removed illegal Proposals, there are no plans for doing this again. Also, Game Mechanics violations are really the only ones enshrined in the FAQ. Committee rules are more of a MetaGame flavor, which is more based on "Common Law", if you will.

At any rate, my stupid aside... well, aside... there's no plans to remove illegal Proposals. If you want them gone, they'll have to be Repealed.

The way forward is simple. Repeal both resolutions and then work together to put in place a working solution so we may effectively investigate and resolve issues of Genocide and severe human rights abuses.

Well, if there are problems with the resolutions, I agree that the resolutions must be repealed and replaced. But I disagree with the time-table you set forth. Instead of focusing on repealing them and then hoping we can discover a good alternative resolution and pass them, the responsible path is to discuss and draft the alternative resolution and then hope there's enough support to repeal and replace. I personally am unwilling to support any legislation changing the current arrangement without having concrete examples of what is wrong with the current PP, why this problem is arising, and how a replacement resolution intends to fix this.

And I doubt I'm the only one interested in such non-obfuscation. I hope the whole process of reforming TPP works out (whether through repeal + replace or just internal procedural changes), as it is about the first (and only, so far as I know) somewhat active UN RP of a resolution function. As such, I really like the precedent it's setting--that committee-RP involving many nations can produce the desired result of Nationstates and RP in general: fun.

I see no compelling argument for repealing the EON Convention.

Mathieu Vergniaud
Deputy Speaker to the UN

OOC: even if we stop RPing it, it's still there in the ether, probably doing a better job than at present...

I see no compelling argument for repealing the EON Convention.

Try the fact it's illegal under current rules. That's always pretty compelling. Unless you like having illegal resolutions being law. Maybe one that ejects your nation from the UN?

OOC: even if we stop RPing it, it's still there in the ether, probably doing a better job than at present...

OOC: Not really. The only power it really has is in the TPP, and without that being roleplayed the majority of the Eon Convention becomes worthless.

Try the fact it's illegal under current rules. That's always pretty compelling. Unless you like having illegal resolutions being law. Maybe one that ejects your nation from the UN?
OOC: Well, I opposed the decision concerning committees...

OOC: Not really. The only power it really has is in the TPP, and without that being roleplayed the majority of the Eon Convention becomes worthless.
Presumably any committee as defined in the new rules can be regarded as functional; surely the same would apply to a non-RPed committee dating from before these rules?

OOC: Well, I opposed the decision concerning committees...

OOC: Keep in mind that in the original draft of Hack's rules, committees were outright banned. It took one hell of an arguement to get them to be as allowed as they are, and all Hack really did was compromise between the two sides.

Presumably any committee as defined in the new rules can be regarded as functional; surely the same would apply to a non-RPed committee dating from before these rules?

Only if the committee does not outright specify it is to be chaired by nations. If it does and it's before the new rules, then by the very wording of the resolution makes it impossible for the new rules to affect the committee.

While the Admins have removed illegal Proposals, there are no plans for doing this again. Also, Game Mechanics violations are really the only ones enshrined in the FAQ. Committee rules are more of a MetaGame flavor, which is more based on "Common Law", if you will.

At any rate, my stupid aside... well, aside... there's no plans to remove illegal Proposals. If you want them gone, they'll have to be Repealed.

Game Moderators and Game Admins, please correct me if I'm wrong ...

First, the reason those proposals were removed __at that time__, was in part related to the fact that the connection between the UN NationStates page and the new Jolt forum was being upgraded. The list that resolutions were and have been deleted is misleading in this case, in that it does not tell why they were removed. *sigh*

I think it is important to realize when something was done because of a system / game mechanics change and when it was a matter of policy. In this case the system change and Dec. 2003 joke resolution discussions provided a unique "opportunity".

Second, the amount of moderator "involvement" in the UN process dramatically increased in 2004 with Enodia. Anybody who was here in for most of 2004 would have observed this ... sadly the number of active veteran UN players is pretty small.

The reason that those specific older resolutions were cleaned during the Jolt move was in part related to fact that many of those earlier proposals implied direct forum activities and this is a message the moderators did not want at the time. Had those resolutions been submitted when there was a strong moderator presense, they are more likely to have been challenged or deleted. In fact, a second "hippo" resolution was allowed to reach the UN floor in Dec. 2003 after the first, in part because of a change in moderation policy. It should also be pointed out that the "Required Basic Healthcare" resolution had already been replaced in June 2003 (a year before the Jolt move) ... the resolution was not deleted, though the opportunity was there. It is reasonable to ask why this is the case. Think about it ...

The Eon Convention was submitted at a time when there was a strong moderator presence overseeing the UN proposal queue. The resolution had ample opportunity for moderator review. In fact, at least one newbie challenged it then. The Eon Convention and the TPP were found to be legal according to the Enodian protocols and the small game FAQ.

The situtation of the earlier "Furtherment of Democracy" and Eon Convention resolutions are not even remotely related.


[NOTE: It might be appropriate to _move_ my post to moderation as I'm actually now wanting an official clarification on moderation decisions / actions ... in due time..]



n.p. haujobb :: frames // current track --> eye over you