NationStates Jolt Archive

I'll try it once more:

"RECOGNISING that the water situation of NS (NationStates) needs to be resolved quickly.

FULLY AWARE the UNWCC (United Nations Water Cleaning Comitee), is working on a possible solution to that problem.

WORRIED about the fact that the researches made by the UNWCC are eluding the real problem.

DECLARES that the UNWCC has to be repealed to give more concern to the necessity to prevent the extreme use of water for sewage and waste-purposes!

PROPOSES that the mission of a new committee concerned with the clean water supplies in NS should include the enforcement of:

• research of environmental solutions to prevent the unnecessary pollution of water resources in NS;
• research of solutions to the unnecessary waste of water resources for sewage and waste purposes;
• improve education of UN-members in their awareness of the necessity to preserve water-resources as much as possible for their future and the future of NS"

I tried to redefine the UNWCC in a proposal phrased basically on the same grounds as this repeal, but MODS pointed with their evil fingers at me saying that this was against their holy rules and that I will be deleted if I do that the third time. So please help me getting this resolution repealed to be able to reestablish UNWCC with it's new missions afterwards!

Thanks for your attention

PROPOSES that the mission of a new committee concerned with the clean water supplies in NS should include the enforcement of:

• research of environmental solutions to prevent the unnecessary pollution of water resources in NS;
• research of solutions to the unnecessary waste of water resources for sewage and waste purposes;
• improve education of UN-members in their awareness of the necessity to preserve water-resources as much as possible for their future and the future of NS"

I've supported your repeal, but this part worries me. A repeal should only repeal, not propose.

I've supported your repeal, but this part worries me. A repeal should only repeal, not propose.
Which renders it Illegal! :gundge:

PROPOSES that the mission of a new committee concerned with the clean water supplies in NS should include the enforcement of:




--- I can see that this committee has done little to perform as intended and we need to change it and to do that we need a repeal on this resolution to correct the performance of the committee.. Thus I would SUGGEST you keep the following areas (listing some old ones in original propsal that folks might agree with keeping) which this committee has come to some finding in and direct them to look into these areas.....(lising new ones that you feel are needed) in a new proposal. ---



My main question since the concern is that they PROPOSE can they just SUGGEST what might be put into the new one.. As in my brief I didn't PROPOSE just told why then SUGGESTed changes for a new one.

Poeple,
You have to know what you want. If I just repeal without explaining in the repeal everyone asks what are the options (cause this forum isn't read by a lot of Un-members actually). If I tell you what I want in the repeal, everyone answers. "Oh yeah! But you can't do that in a repeal, it's illegal!"

This rule about first having to get something repealed and only then being able to put a new proposal at vote is ridiculous! That way, we are only left with a "non-legislation"-period in between the two actions, which is good for noone. Also, if a new proposal won't pass, you just have killed a legislation and we're back in nowhere land. Which is good for noone.

Oh and thanks to Zeldon 6229 Nodlez for contacting the Mods personnally about this one. I'm sure they will understand ... :gundge:

Your proposal reads:

"PROPOSES that the mission of a new committee concerned with the clean water supplies in NS should include the enforcement of:"

Maybe if it were instead to read:

"PROPOSES that if the Establish UNWCC resolution is repealed that it would be possible to make a new proposal, which could change the mission of the UNWCC to include the enforcement of:"

This too might be something the moderators consider illegal, but if you like what I've suggested here, ask them first. When you try to follow the rules, the moderators often will give advice. They are supposed to be moderators, not police, and as such, they honestly are more interested in *not* having to zap things. Er, most of the time. ;)


For the record, the UNWCC is only a few resolutions old. I'd rather we wait another month and find some other way to enhance the committee Sunteria frankly had a hard enough time with the change in categories from Human Rights to Social Justice, that if most of us were in their position, we'd no doubt feel very picked on.

My alternative would be to find a way to add responsibilities to the UNWCC without taking anything away from it, thus there might not even be a need for a repeal. We've done this with the International Red Cross Organization a number of times, so it is possible.

My alternative would be to find a way to add responsibilities to the UNWCC without taking anything away from it, thus there might not even be a need for a repeal. We've done this with the International Red Cross Organization a number of times, so it is possible.

Tryed that by writing "PROPOSES to extend the missions of the UNWCC to:" ... or something very like that. (Sorry, don't have the exact wording anymore, because text went through a lot of changes.) This proposal was immediately deleted by Mods and I got this TG saying that this being my first attempt against the rules, I have only two left before getting deleted ... So I think that there's no way to get this done without repealing first, as much as I repsect the hard work done by the committee Sunteria.

Tryed that by writing "PROPOSES to extend the missions of the UNWCC to:" ... or something very like that. (Sorry, don't have the exact wording anymore, because text went through a lot of changes.) This proposal was immediately deleted by Mods and I got this TG saying that this being my first attempt against the rules, I have only two left before getting deleted ... So I think that there's no way to get this done without repealing first, as much as I repsect the hard work done by the committee Sunteria.


Think you are missing the point here... you are repealing a PROPOSal thus you can only do that then have to submit separate the new PROPOSAL and let it be debated.. The Repeal simply says you have enough support to consider removing this not to get yours in.. As somebody else may also want this repealed and have one waiting to PROPOSE.. Thus it will be debated and one decided as the rule of the land (UN). The key is one must remove what is here first then toss up for vote new ones or one. By including PROPOSes in the Repeal you would not allow debate over what they replace it with.

Thus use SUGGEST in the REPEAL as an open to debate on what will replace it.. also to help show a need to REPEAL it... don't establish by PROPOSing as that what becomes a RESOLUTION we follow in UN..

Check out the push on GAY RIGHTS repeal and ask who is trying to get it removed so they can do what about it because they have one view on GAY RIGHTS... this is the nature of the game some win some lose.. and the rules are made to make it fun... so in a repeal SUGGEST leave the PROPOSING to the new PROPOSAL...

Still would like to hear from MODS input if simply going to SUGGESTING not PROPOSING in a REPEAL makes it legal on issue repeals are just that repeals not proposals.. as they should be able in one to suggested expected changes in a new one.

Ok, Ok, I'll try just suggesting next time. Still I think that first having to repeal is only causing a dangerous legislation void (even if I enjoy the game, or I wouldn't be here anymore).

Ok, Ok, I'll try just suggesting next time. Still I think that first having to repeal is only causing a dangerous legislation void (even if I enjoy the game, or I wouldn't be here anymore).
The legislation void isn't really "dangerous", per se. It just defaults control of the issue back to individual nations, which, I assure you, isn't as evil as it's often made out to be ;).

The legislation void isn't really "dangerous", per se. It just defaults control of the issue back to individual nations, which, I assure you, isn't as evil as it's often made out to be ;).


Politicis is always a danger when ones wording can be taken in a multinational setting to mean so many different things. PROPOSAL, SUGGESTION to some mean same, others; one is on Dullsvile other on Starmond, here you don't want to be on Dullsville so no Proposing but want to be on Starmond so you Suggest. The key is to get rid of a Pain in Sitter so can Propose a repacement to protect your Sitter. I don't think will ever learn all the polital games played in this NSUN to get things done. But have learned here. Thanks Chipper, opps Sir Chipmunks.. want to be politicly correct here..