NationStates Jolt Archive

Just a quick question, i'm seeing well quite a few resolutions being repeal, and I have been told that the reason for this is that are not complete and need to be repealed before new better resolutions can be passed. Well I have yet to see a new resolution to make up for the ones repealed. And in the meantime civil liberties are being infringed as the rights people once held are no longer mandatory in UN States. So I say to the countries repealing the resolution that they should have an acompaning resolution with all repeals.

http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/notagain.jpg

"Civil liberties are being infringed"?! How? Because the UN struck out two environmental proposals that did nothing, and a plainly illegal one governing international waters? Look, I am not of the mind that legislative "voids," so to speak, are a bad thing. If it were up to me, the UN wouldn't even consider replacing repealed resolutions until a fair amount of time had passed, and the members had the opportunity to ponder the consequences of the repeal, whether replacement was really necessary, and what form a responsible new resolution would take. That is often not the case. But even I have to admit that a replacement for "Law of the Sea" is under consideration, and its author is very trustworthy. Replacements for UCPL are also being considered.

But instantly replacing shit with more shit accomplishes nothing. I refer you to Fossil Fuel Reduction Act and Worldwide Media Act (defeated), both instant replacements, both awful in every respect.

P.S. Shut up Fonzo. :p

OK, OK, a more friendly approach.

1. There is a thread called Lotsa repeals (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=465142) discussing the issue, and this debate has spilled over to various other threads.

2. Anyone can propose a replacement.
Yes, that means you!
http://i.rollingstone.com/assets/rs/7/2047815/images/00336841.jpg

3. Things are repealed for a reason. If I vote for a repeal it is because it will not create a void, rather it will remove bad law from the books. And removing bad law is good, not evil.

Once more: if all the people who spent their time moaning that WAAAH! there's no new proposals! :( actually wrote a proposal, then we'd be in business. However, that would require their putting the tiniest fraction of effort in, rather than bitching about how - although they haven't done shit - we're all nasty people for removing bad laws. Le sigh.

The real problem is that people think they can fix everything. They can't. They make all these wonderful new proposals that they think are going to make the wrold run more smoothly; what they're really doing is just flooding the UN with proposals. It would be a lot better if people asked themselves whether the proposal would really be beneficial and whether it would really be neccessary before they make one. People should make proposals to fix major problems, not just because they think they can make the world better.

Once more: if all the people who spent their time moaning that WAAAH! there's no new proposals! :( actually wrote a proposal, then we'd be in business.
Either that, or the silly proposla thread would be a lot busier.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

The real problem is that people think they can fix everything. They can't. They make all these wonderful new proposals that they think are going to make the wrold run more smoothly; what they're really doing is just flooding the UN with proposals. It would be a lot better if people asked themselves whether the proposal would really be beneficial and whether it would really be neccessary before they make one. People should make proposals to fix major problems, not just because they think they can make the world better.

Welcome to the forums where our hope is to find those proposals that truly make the world better, improve those proposal so they work and don't look like shit, and then do everything in our power to get those proposals to quoram and passed.

Just realized, this is the troll from the other thread. I suggest we bow out: he's not here to reason.