NationStates Jolt Archive

I have had a state for quite some time, but almost never visit the forum. I signed up with the UN only last week.
Now, I just have to ask, and I am sure you've all heard it before, WHAT THE HECK is with really badly written UN resolutions? I started reading them this morning, just to see what I had signed on to, and I could not believe the amount of crap that has been passed. What's worse is that they did in fact pass!!!
Take, for example, the recent proposal to repeal the hydrogen powered vehicle resolution. The repeal was well thought out, unlike (in every way) the hydrogen resolution.
Is there no requirement beyond one other person backing your resolution? Can we not put in place some sort of rules that outline how UN resolutions should look?

Just a thought

--Rooty

The best way to prevent rubbish like "Hydrogen Powered Vehicles" from making it to the books is to be active here and working with others to inform via telegram campaigns those who don't bother delving into the debates here. The best way to get rubbish like "Hydrogen Powered Vehicles" off the books is to support repeals by voting for them and telegramming regional delegates to garner support for repeals.

The way it works:

1. To submit a proposal, you need 2 endorsements.
2. Proposals have to be approved by 6% of delegates. That's about 125 delegates at the moment.

So there are some checks.

As to the old resolutions - I agree many of them suck. All we can do is repeal them over time.

I have had a state for quite some time, but almost never visit the forum. I signed up with the UN only last week.Welcome to the UN.Now, I just have to ask, and I am sure you've all heard it before, WHAT THE HECK is with really badly written UN resolutions? I started reading them this morning, just to see what I had signed on to, and I could not believe the amount of crap that has been passed. What's worse is that they did in fact pass!!!I'd like to think we have higher standards nowadays. As for passing - blame the membership, not the author.
Is there no requirement beyond one other person backing your resolution?Yes are other requirements to getting a resolution. Having 2 other members endorse you, having 6% of delegates endorse your proposal, and having greater 50% of the UN membership vote for your proposal.Can we not put in place some sort of rules that outline how UN resolutions should look?Rules? No. Guidance? has been done.

*Looks at join date
*Looks at the join dates of Gruen, Cluich and Hirota
*Looks at the join date of My Travelling Harem

This is more our fault than yours because.......?

--------------------

The recent repeal attempt failed, in a large part, because of its failure to sell to the average person. When conservative members of my region are disputing some of the claims made, the majority that are anti-business, pro-environment fluffies who are incapable of wrapping their heads around concepts such as "average third world nation" and "past tech" are NOT going to side with the resolution. It is simply a matter of the dichotomy of those who are truly active in the UN and those that make the decisions.

The overall quality of UN proposals has clearly been improving over time. Several events had a clear impact, others had a more subtle effect. My (non-modly) take on those, in order of importance. The introduction of Repeals (allowed for the first time an opportunity to correct past mistakes, and allowing closed topics to be reopened)
The move to Jolt (removed several blatantly illegal proposals that set a horrible precedent)
The Enodian Laws (first attempt to establish official rules of conduct)
The Wolfish Convention on POW (in my opinion, the first really solid proposal)
The rise of a strong and varied UN Forum community (this comes and goes, and has been negatively impacted on several occasions by strong players with nasty attitudes that (IMO) prevented rather than enhanced a sense of community. Hopefully that's in the past.)
The Most Glorious Protocols (revision of the Enodian laws added much-needed clarity)
Rights and Duties of UN States (modesty should prevent me from listing my own contribution, but it doesn't. First serious attempt to define the effect of sovereignty - or lack thereof - from a role-play perspective. One of the first proposals creating via extensive collaboration on the UN forums, I believe)
Founding of NSwiki and the United Nations Association (providing a historical context, and for the first time providing an accessible repository of failed and removed resolutions)
HIPPOS ARE REALLY QUITE LARGE (drove home the point that Joke proposals really don't belong in the UN)
United Nations Security Act (providing a legal precedent for sovereignty claims in proposals.
Repeal "Abortion Rights" (removing perhaps the most disputed early resolution has created extensive debate and collaborative redrafting) I could justify moving several of these up or down quite easily, but overall I think they point to a significant improvement over the last several years, with the future looking brighter all the time.

Good list. I don't think UNSA was the precedent, really - that came in National Systems of Tax, or even Right to Refuse Extradition - but as it stimulated the greatest (amount of) debate, you're probably right to pinpoint that. Also, Mikitivity may not always have been the most popular poster, nor now the most obviously active, but I think his first two resolutions set a pretty good standard that others - most notably Powerhungry Chipmunks - have followed.

I would add to your list Repeal "Legalize Prostitution" (as part of the repeals section - it was the first "real" repeal to pass, and it also set up the first replacement).

Mikitivity ... set a pretty good standard that others have followed.
Yeah, that's an excellent point. Mikitivity and Sophista were the driving forces behind establishing a legalistic UN-style format to proposals. That format is used by practically all of the successful proposal writers. I'd easily slip that in at #5 or #6.

We could also add "National Systems of Tax" to my current #10. I don't think "Right to Refuse Extradition" has had the same sort of impact, even though it may deserve it.

Frisbee,
Thanx for the info. I was not aware of those measures.
I will certainly grant that a lot of the newer resolutions and/or proposals look a whole lot better than the older ones. I was just wondering how some of the old crap ever came to be.
Are there people who go through some of the old resolutions, to see what is worth removal? I would certainly be willing to do that, and then post repeals.

--Rooty

I have had a state for quite some time, but almost never visit the forum. I signed up with the UN only last week.
Now, I just have to ask, and I am sure you've all heard it before, WHAT THE HECK is with really badly written UN resolutions? I started reading them this morning, just to see what I had signed on to, and I could not believe the amount of crap that has been passed. What's worse is that they did in fact pass!!!
Take, for example, the recent proposal to repeal the hydrogen powered vehicle resolution. The repeal was well thought out, unlike (in every way) the hydrogen resolution.
Is there no requirement beyond one other person backing your resolution? Can we not put in place some sort of rules that outline how UN resolutions should look?

--Rooty

Just a thought...

When a child is first learning to walk, it often falls on its ass. Once it has gotten more practice in walking, it can go without falling, but still totters around, lacking in grace. With more practice, it will attain the necessary balance and control to become a consistently good walker. Resolutions in the history list are like photographs of the child's failures and successes with walking. Understandably, we have been trying to eliminate the photographs of failures as much as possible because they are embarrassing to us. The difficulty is that some part of us likes to hold on to these photographs out of sentimentality.

Frisbee,
Thanx for the info. I was not aware of those measures.
I will certainly grant that a lot of the newer resolutions and/or proposals look a whole lot better than the older ones. I was just wondering how some of the old crap ever came to be.
Are there people who go through some of the old resolutions, to see what is worth removal? I would certainly be willing to do that, and then post repeals.

--Rooty
Some time ago, there was talk of establishing a "Sunset Committee" to do just that, but I don't think anything formally came of it. However, there have been proposal authors, such as Powerhungry Chipmunks, Omigodtheykilledkenny, and Jey, who've gone through old resolutions and targetted them for repeal, with a great deal of success. Jey has now set up a forum (http://s9.invisionfree.com/Reveal_and_Repeal/index.php?) for discussion of further reducing the old chaff.

Yeah, but the trouble is, if we do too many repeals in a row, we raise the ire of the ignorant "OMGooses! Not another damn repeal!" crowd. :rolleyes:

Just a thought...

When a child is first learning to walk, it often falls on its ass. Once it has gotten more practice in walking, it can go without falling, but still totters around, lacking in grace. With more practice, it will attain the necessary balance and control to become a consistently good walker. Resolutions in the history list are like photographs of the child's failures and successes with walking. Understandably, we have been trying to eliminate the photographs of failures as much as possible because they are embarrassing to us. The difficulty is that some part of us likes to hold on to these photographs out of sentimentality.
Man, that's close to being the most beautiful thing I've seen written in this forum!

Yeah, but the trouble is, if we do too many repeals in a row, we raise the ire of the ignorant "OMGooses! Not another damn repeal!" crowd.
I understand the frustration such people have, though. To someone not involved in proposal drafting it must seem like we're spending most of our time simply undoing what we did before. You get to thinking 'what was the point?'.

Man, that's close to being the most beautiful thing I've seen written in this forum!

Heh. Thanks.

I live to serve and all that rot. ;)

To be fair, though, this "repeal phase" is kind of annoying when you consider that, after this repeal phase, we have to have a whole slew of replacement resolutions...and that'll take alot of time away from new proposals that address as yet untouched world issues. Not that I don't agree with the sentiment that the old resolutions should be removed (and unlike photographs, they still have impact today too) but I feel that there should be some effort made to make sure a shiny new proposal makes its way through all the repeals and replacements, just to make sure we dont' tread water.

I feel that there should be some effort made to make sure a shiny new proposal makes its way through all the repeals and replacements, just to make sure we dont' tread water.
Sometimes a repeal isn't for a replacement. Sometimes it's just about something that never should have been made law in the first place. Our Tsunami resolution would never have passed had it not been for RL sentiment, and I'm sure there are others with equally questionable histories.

One thing I forgot to mention in my earlier list was the "wake effect". Someone puts out a really excellent proposal, and accompanies the posting with a thorough telegram campaign. Interested delegates go check it out, Approve it, and (while they're hanging out in UN proposal land) endorse a few lesser candidates. I firmly believe that "Passport Harmonisation" and "Save the Forests of the World" would never have made queue had it not been for the extensive telegramming that accompanied Ninjadom's and my successful resolutions. They rode our wakes and coasted to the floor.

The same is true in reverse. Enn's excellent "Habeas Corpus" suffered from bad timing and poor connectivity, requiring I think 8 submissions before the proposal made queue. Enn had the unfortunate luck to make several of those attempts during the Jolt move, when the forums were gone for quite a while. Call it the "Becalmed" effect.

It's not always about good law or bad law. Politics is timing. Ask Jimmy Carter (who returned the Iran hostages on Reagan's Inauguration Day) how it feels sometime.

The same is true in reverse. Enn's excellent "Habeas Corpus" suffered from bad timing and poor connectivity, requiring I think 8 submissions before the proposal made queue.
Try 15, which I believe is still the record for the most submissions needed to get a proposal to quorum.

To be fair, though, this "repeal phase" is kind of annoying when you consider that, after this repeal phase, we have to have a whole slew of replacement resolutions...and that'll take alot of time away from new proposals that address as yet untouched world issues. Not that I don't agree with the sentiment that the old resolutions should be removed (and unlike photographs, they still have impact today too) but I feel that there should be some effort made to make sure a shiny new proposal makes its way through all the repeals and replacements, just to make sure we dont' tread water.
Bullshit.

From the first repeal passing, there have been 22 passed repeals, by my reckoning. Of those, the following have been "replaced":
- Legalize Prostitution --> The Sex Industry Worker Act
- The Global Library --> Universal Library Coalition
- Elimination of Bio Weapons -- UN Biological Weapons Ban
- National Systems of Tax --> Representation in Taxation
- Promotion of Solar Panels --> Fossil Fuel Reduction Act
- The Law of the Sea --> Maritime Safety Standards (more replacements may follow)
- The Rights of Labor Unions --> The Right to Form Unions
- Abortion Rights --> Abortion Legality Convention

The following "replacements" failed, were withdrawn, etc:
- Fight The Axis Of Evil --> Anti-Terrorism Act (not really a replacement, but along the same lines)
- Ban Chemical Weapons --> Chemical Weaponry Ban (queued, but withdrawn by author)
- DVD Region Removal --> Worldwide Media Act
- Abortion Rights --> Clinical Abortion Rights (deleted - see ALC)

"Replacements" for the following are being proposed:
- UCPL --> UN Patent Law (queued)
- Right to Divorce --> I think a replacement may be drafted
- MANDATORY RECYCLING --> I know a replacement is being drafted
- Stop dumping - Start Cleaning/MANDATORY RECYCLING - Waste Disposal Covenant (queued)
- Scientific Freedom --> Bazalonia's replacement is, I think, good to go

The following, by their very nature, have not been and probably cannot be replaced:
- Education For All (redundant)
- Required Basic Healthcare (see 'RBH' Replacement)
- Protection of Dolphins Act (redundant)
- Save the forests of the World (sucked so badly you couldn't replace it)
- Gay Rights (redundant)

All of which means:

1. Since repeals being introduced, there have been 76 passed resolutions (compared to 77 before)
- of those, 22 have been repeals
- a further 8 have been replacements
- leaving 46 "shiny new proposals".

That enough for you?

- Fight The Axis Of Evil --> Anti-Terrorism Act (not really a replacement, but along the same lines)

Ugh...please don't compare the two. :(

I am looking through the resolutions.

Resolutions #87 and #91 conflict. One repeals the legalized prostitution act, the other promotes the sex trade. We can't have both.
Resolutions #7, #14, #19, #25, #44, #69, #80, #88, #89 and #99 are all nearly the same. They all deal with minority rights, and in particular the rights of women, children, gays, the mentally ill and religious groups. We really only need one resolution that either encompasses ALL freedoms, or we have a resolution for each group. We don't need a whole pile of resolutions that overlap. We also have a Universal Bill of rights, #26 and a Universal Freedom of Choice, #53.
Resolutions #18, #39 and #71 all deal with renewable energy sources. They are almost all exactly the same in their intent. We only need one of them.
Poorly thought out resolutions include
#10, privacy intrusion
#23, replanting trees
#43, euthanasia.... and given that there is only about 800 votes difference, this is one that I think should definitely be revisted
#59, forty hour work week... imaginative, but not practical
#70, banning whaling
#78, axis of evil
#81, definition of marriage.... To be honest, I am appalled that this was ever suggested. Given that for many, many cultures, marriage is a religious ceremony, there is no possible way to uphold this and also ensure a countries freedom of religion or cultural practices.

Those are the bad ones. There are also a lot of good ones, but I won't go through them all. I just want to say that some of the more formal-looking proposals were really well done.


--Rooty

Resolutions #87 and #91 conflict. One repeals the legalized prostitution act, the other promotes the sex trade. We can't have both.
Yes you can. 87 repealed the previous resolution; 91 replaced it. Repeals have no legal force once they've passed; all they do is strike out legislation. So it went:

No resolution - national decision
Original resolution - UN decision (legalise)
Repeal - national decision
Replacement - UN decision (legalise)

Resolutions #7, #14, #19, #25, #44, #69, #80, #88, #89 and #99 are all nearly the same. They all deal with minority rights, and in particular the rights of women, children, gays, the mentally ill and religious groups. We really only need one resolution that either encompasses ALL freedoms, or we have a resolution for each group. We don't need a whole pile of resolutions that overlap. We also have a Universal Bill of rights, #26 and a Universal Freedom of Choice, #53.
Well, yes and no. Yes: it would be good to clear up the clutter of discrimination legislation; no: it would be prohibitively hard. Also, some argue that the overlap is good: it serves to ensure extra protection (one can be repealed, ten takes much longer).

Resolutions #18, #39 and #71 all deal with renewable energy sources. They are almost all exactly the same in their intent. We only need one of them.
I agree with this - the GTT (http://s13.invisionfree.com/Green_Think_Tank) might consider repealing one of them for redundancy.

--snipped list--
Well, now you're just getting into personal preferences. I mostly agree with you, but I think it's best here to deal with resolutions that are objectively bad, rather than simply ones we happen to disagree with.

Well, yes and no. Yes: it would be good to clear up the clutter of discrimination legislation; no: it would be prohibitively hard. Also, some argue that the overlap is good: it serves to ensure extra protection (one can be repealed, ten takes much longer).
...
I agree with this - the GTT (http://s13.invisionfree.com/Green_Think_Tank) might consider repealing one of them for redundancy.

What exactly is your reasoning for clearing up the resource legislations but not clearing up the civil rights legislations? Don't you think you are being incosistent?

Well, now you're just getting into personal preferences. I mostly agree with you, but I think it's best here to deal with resolutions that are objectively bad, rather than simply ones we happen to disagree with.
Did you read the resolutions I posted? It's not a matter of my disagreement with the content (although, in the case of the Euthanasia and marriage bills, I do), and I made that quite clear. The wording of the bills leaves much to be desired. They are nowhere near the quality of some of our other stuff. In the case of the euthanasia bill, it's not really a bill at all, just a posting of rhetorical questions (don't you think person X has the right to die?? if you care at all for the good of mankind, you will allow people to make their own decisions concerning the timing of their death, you heartless monster!!! and so on).
We also have a bill prohibiting religious wars. I almost laughed when I read it. Whoever drafted it didn't think about the fact that what constitutes a religious "war" could vary from nation to nation. For example, supposing one nation's religion is Islam and another nation's religion is Christianity and they go to war over land and currency. Is the war about land, or is it a religious war, since we have two religious nations fighting? What if a war has some religious and some secular elements to it? Also, the bill begins with the historical fallacy that religion has been the cause of most wars throughout history. The cause of war has been debated since before we were born, and will no doubt continue to be long after we die. (we need an eye-rolling smilie, by the way)

--Rooty
PS: It's My Travelling Harem, not Mr. Travelling Harem. I'm a woman, not a guy.

:rolleyes:

(we need an eye-rolling smilie, by the way)

There it is.

What exactly is your reasoning for clearing up the resource legislations but not clearing up the civil rights legislations? Don't you think you are being incosistent?
No. The reason for clearing up the resource legislation is that together they put too great a financial strain on developing nations. Civil rights legislation make no such strain.

No. The reason for clearing up the resource legislation is that together they put too great a financial strain on developing nations. Civil rights legislation make no such strain.

I think it is worth arguing that financial strain is perhaps not the worst thing that could happen to a society. Civil rights are at least as important, if not more.
It might be worth doing a blanket repeal for ALL the civil rights resolutions at once, and coming up with a universal replacement. This would cut down on the time needed to fixthe problem. Imagine if we had to repeal each resolution one at a time? That would take forever. But, we could draft a new resolution that does what the sum of all the others was supposed to do.

--Rooty

It might be worth doing a blanket repeal for ALL the civil rights resolutions at once

Not allowed: Repeals legally must be for dealing with a single past Resolution each...

Not allowed: Repeals legally must be for dealing with a single past Resolution each...

Maybe we can talk the rule makers into making an exception for this one instance. It's certainly worth a try, since there is a lot of crap to clean up. Besides, one can argue that in the "real" world, laws can be repealed en masse.

--Rooty

Maybe we can talk the rule makers into making an exception for this one instance. It's certainly worth a try, since there is a lot of crap to clean up. Besides, one can argue that in the "real" world, laws can be repealed en masse.

--Rooty
While laws may be repealed en masse in the real world, in NS repeals can only hit one resolution at a time because that's how the repeal function is coded into the game.

Maybe we can talk the rule makers into making an exception for this one instance.
Not gonna happen. No.

And besides, killing Human Rights resolution after Human Rights resolution, one repeal at a time, would slowly chip away at the CR stats of all the proud fluffy nations. And that would make me happy.

no, the proud fluffy nations would have the same stats because they let those things go on anyway. All the dictatorships would sink to lower levels of oppression is all.

no, the proud fluffy nations would have the same stats because they let those things go on anyway. All the dictatorships would sink to lower levels of oppression is all.
No, speaking in terms of game mechanics there would be changes made to the fluffy nation's stats. On the other hand, I'm sure that their daily issue choices would be able to cancel them out.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

Haha. You know, you guys usually just tell NSUN newbies to read the damn Rules thread. The fact that you've instead patiently answered each of her questions makes me begin to suspect that this entire thread is staged as a demo. It's too much like an educational film on how the NSUN works...

MyTravellingHarem, dressed as an adorable 8 year-old girl, walks upto a man in a suit and tie (Gruenberg). She pulls on his jacket sleeve, looks up with cherubic innocence and asks, "Excuse me, Mr. Politican man. Could you tell me, how does a proposal become a Resolution?"

Gruen answers by paraphrasing sections from Rules For UN Proposals [Now Binding]. Then, Frisbee provides a voiceover while highlights from Resolution history (likely depicting some of the older Resolutions as dinosaurs or cavemen) roll with a wacky old-timey honky-tonk piano music score.

"But aren't some of these Resolutions kind of old and worn out?" asks MyTravellingHarem, blowing thick clouds of dust from a stack of leather-bound tomes. "Can't we just throw them out, like old newspapers," she says grasping a few choice resolutions. "...and these all do the same thing. I think we only need one of them," says MyTravellingHarem, chucking Resolution after nearly-identical Resolution into a large dumpster.

"Hold your horses, little lady," Gruenberg interrupts, "you can't just throw out old Resolutions. They have to be Repealed."

"Re... Re-pealed?" asks MyTravellingHarem, wide-eyed. "What's "Repealed"? Does it hurt?"

and so on...

Add a musical number or two and you've got the NSUN's very own version of SchoolHouse Rock...

Then, Frisbee provides a voiceover while highlights from Resolution history (likely depicting some of the older Resolutions as dinosaurs or cavemen) roll with a wacky old-timey honky-tonk piano music score.
I'll have you know that most of my responses are scored by Stravinsky or Prokofiev, the lush but discordant phrasing punctuating my occasionally attenuated style. Naturally, Wagner plays in the background for my most pompous of rulings, but Carl Stalling was responsible for a lot of the General and Moderation posts.

Honky-tonk, bah!

I always pictured you using Copeland, Fris...

OOC: "Appalachain Spring" or "Fanfare for the Common Man"? Or even "Billy the Kid"?

I always pictured you using Copeland, Fris...
Frisbbeteria: Every little thing he does is MAGIC!

Frisbbeteria: Every little thing he does is MAGIC!

Not Stewart Copeland... :p

Frisbbeteria: Every little thing he does is MAGIC!The Magical Mister Fristoffelees?

Damn. You should have stuck with what I gave you, Frisbee. Honk-tonk piana [sic] is better than Cats or Copeland any day. Early 20th century US high-art composers in general are teh suck. We even managed to suckify our imports... like Dvorak-- his New World symphony was ungood.

Wha--? From the New World was Dvorak's best work. But I must admit, Fris's suggestion of Stravinsky would be pretty good. Nothing like some Primitivism to get the mood going.

Not Stewart Copeland... :p
I'm so glad someone spotted that...

MyTravellingHarem, dressed as an adorable 8 year-old girl,

<snort>
Here is a more accurate representation of myself.
My Travelling Harem, a well-educated, 28-year old political junkie and web-head with Conservative leanings one day decides to involve herself in what could be an interesting community. Upon reading the many resolutions of the UN, she discovers, much to her extreme disappointment, that many of the resolutions were written by naive, Libertarian teenagers who haven't spent a day in a political science or history class and are overly influenced by biased media. Those people who may actually have a clue and write excellent resolutions are repeatedly ignored. My Travelling Harem decides it's high time to put forth her talents and assist the community intellectuals in their quest for a decent simulation of our political reality.

Clear enough for you? Instead of thinly veiled ad hominem, you might try contributing to the discussion in some sort of useful manner.

--Rooty

MTH, I think it was intended as a gentle joke about prevailing forum attitudes, not an ad hominem against you. Careful when taking offence - you might be mistaking a poster's intentions. After all, you can't see their face or hear the tone of their voice when theypost.

Yeah, I'm fairly sure it was a joke.

MTH, I think it was intended as a gentle joke about prevailing forum attitudes, not an ad hominem against you. Careful when taking offence - you might be mistaking a poster's intentions. After all, you can't see their face or hear the tone of their voice when theypost.

MmmHmmm.
Because, clearly this is my fist forum experience, and I can't read and need things explained to me...

Continuing on...
While laws may be repealed en masse in the real world, in NS repeals can only hit one resolution at a time because that's how the repeal function is coded into the game.

Ah.
And there's the rub.
I have to say, that is an unfortunate limit to an otherwise cool feature. That might be something to consider changing when Nation States 2 is released. Is it possible to manually repeal resolutions, instead of letting the program do it? (I realize, that is probably going to be more work than just repealing one resolution automatically, I just want to know if it is possible.)

--Rooty

Ah.
And there's the rub.
I have to say, that is an unfortunate limit to an otherwise cool feature. That might be something to consider changing when Nation States 2 is released. Is it possible to manually repeal resolutions, instead of letting the program do it? (I realize, that is probably going to be more work than just repealing one resolution automatically, I just want to know if it is possible.)

--Rooty

The admins have said several times to several people including the mods that by the time it hits quarom, it's not being removed. They can make resolutions disappear (and have, actually), but it takes too much time and effort on their part - especially for volunteer labor

The admins have said several times to several people including the mods that by the time it hits quarom, it's not being removed. They can make resolutions disappear (and have, actually), but it takes too much time and effort on their part - especially for volunteer labor

I can believe it.
Again, that's too bad.
I guess the only thing we can do is make sure that future resolutions don't overlap old ones. As far as repealing each of the old, redundant resolutions goes, that's probably not something that should be done all at once (since voting on repeal after repeal would probably get pretty boring)

--Rooty

many of the resolutions were written by naive, Libertarian teenagers

Libertarians? They're a rare breed in the NSUN, except for some members of the Arctic Oasis. Liberals are very common though, as I'm sure you've noticed.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

I suspect it was a reference to "civil", rather than "economic", libertarians, given the delegate's concern over the number of human rights resolutions.

I suspect it was a reference to "civil", rather than "economic", libertarians, given the delegate's concern over the number of human rights resolutions.

Ah, I see.

MTBOOOBUY

-L. Otterby, AFTROCTTUN.

Ah, I see.

MTBOOOBUY

-L. Otterby, AFTROCTTUN.
Swanky acronyms.

I suspect it was a reference to "civil", rather than "economic", libertarians,

Yep.

Actually, now that I think about it, if the majority of this community lived in Canada (where I am from), I think most would vote NDP, our resident socialist party that's all for doing whatever you want as long as you pay through the nose in taxes and have a million laws to keep the the playing field "level". ;)

--Rooty

Swanky acronyms.

OOC: They look vaguely obscene, but that's probably just my over-active imagination. I think I'll stick to longhand in future.

Yep.

Actually, now that I think about it, if the majority of this community lived in Canada (where I am from), I think most would vote NDP, our resident socialist party that's all for doing whatever you want as long as you pay through the nose in taxes and have a million laws to keep the the playing field "level". ;)

--Rooty

OOC: Ah Canadians, my second favourite people in the world after the Irish. And good on Jack Layton for continuing the fight against neo-liberalism I say.

And good on Jack Layton for continuing the fight against neo-liberalism I say.

Obviously you aren't familiar with NDP policy...
Oh the stories I could tell you.

--Rooty
PS: I am dying laughing. I know you probably weren't trying to be funny, but seriously, that is the most hilarious thing I have read in a while.

The admins have said several times to several people including the mods that by the time it hits quarom, it's not being removed. They can make resolutions disappear (and have, actually), but it takes too much time and effort on their part - especially for volunteer labor
The mods can and have nuked proposals that have reached quorum, it's once they hit the floor for voting that their hands are tied.

Obviously you aren't familiar with NDP policy...
Oh the stories I could tell you.

--Rooty
PS: I am dying laughing. I know you probably weren't trying to be funny, but seriously, that is the most hilarious thing I have read in a while.

OOC: It was intended to be somewhat sardonic, but I do have a genuine admiration for the policies of the NDP, particulary relating to gay rights, gun control, greater aboriginal rights and combatting child poverty.

OOC: It was intended to be somewhat sardonic, but I do have a genuine admiration for the policies of the NDP, particulary relating to gay rights, gun control, greater aboriginal rights and combatting child poverty.

Which is why I am laughing.
The NDP is full of idea people. When it comes to actually doing anything useful, they invariably botch it up or find themselves doing something that is so obviously against their party policy.
Like propping up the Liberal government when they had been determined to bring it down for its corruption. This was all to get a one page budget ammendment (to the tune of over $4billion... think of the resultant tax hike) that really did nothing useful.
Or, like Layton being called to task for going to a private clinic for a hernia operation when he argues ad infinitum about the virtues of our failing health care system and the "evils" of private clinics. His excuse? "Well, I didn't know it was private." Hello? Shouldice Hospital is the most famous private clinic in the country!
Or giving Desjarlais the boot for voting according to what her constituents wanted over the gay marriage bill. So democratic.
Every last person who got voted in, with the sole exception of Olivia Chow, is white and yet they brag about representing all minority groups. They brag about having the most women in government, and yet all the women they have suck! They are totally at the beck and call of the unions in our country, and they have no clue at all about the meaning of the phrase "fiscal responsibility."

But, this is probably not the place for my political rantings.

--Rooty

So...

...about those bad proposals?

Libertarians? They're a rare breed in the NSUN, except for some members of the Arctic Oasis. Liberals are very common though, as I'm sure you've noticed.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

Actually, that's the Antarctic Oasis, thank you. ;)

And yes, liberals -- per the US political definition -- are extremely prevalent. There's also a relatively sizable cadre of conservatives. True libertarians, from my perspective (and I am one, with the possible exception of my staunchly pro-defense views), are rare.

True libertarians, from my perspective (and I am one, with the possible exception of my staunchly pro-defense views), are rare.

I think that we've had some of them around in the 'Conservative Paradise' too.

I think that we've had some of them around in the 'Conservative Paradise' too.

We're still a rarity. ;)

Yep.

Actually, now that I think about it, if the majority of this community lived in Canada (where I am from), I think most would vote NDP, our resident socialist party that's all for doing whatever you want as long as you pay through the nose in taxes and have a million laws to keep the the playing field "level". ;)

--Rooty

Drop the crap.

Despite the fact that the NDP have struggled with many problems including being too left for Canadian politics, they have earned the right to be respected. You can easily make a list similarly long about the Conservatives (Mr Emmerson?) or the Liberals (Sponsorship Scandal?) - and for that matter, the Democrats, Republicans in the US, or the various parties in Britain who's names escape me or any other nation (where I don't have a clue). Every party has its problems, its failings, its areas of difficulty, problems with implementation, problems with ideas being totally bogus, or various other problems.

Your defamation of those who have written the past proposals and resolutions and your criticism of the policies (which actually, civil liberties wise, line up a bit better with the Libs, not the NDP) is ludicrous. Take your issues elsewhere.

Drop the crap.

Despite the fact that the NDP have struggled with many problems including being too left for Canadian politics, they have earned the right to be respected. You can easily make a list similarly long about the Conservatives (Mr Emmerson?) or the Liberals (Sponsorship Scandal?) - and for that matter, the Democrats, Republicans in the US, or the various parties in Britain who's names escape me or any other nation (where I don't have a clue). Every party has its problems, its failings, its areas of difficulty, problems with implementation, problems with ideas being totally bogus, or various other problems.

Your defamation of those who have written the past proposals and resolutions and your criticism of the policies (which actually, civil liberties wise, line up a bit better with the Libs, not the NDP) is ludicrous. Take your issues elsewhere.

Defamation.
Heh heh.
Them's fightin' words missy.
Unless you are saying that my suggesting that the resolutions must have been written by NDP-types is an insult... which is interesting, given your defense of a party you probably don't know much about.
It's pretty hard to say that there are no problems with the resolutions we have. In fact, judging from this thread, it would seem to be the consensus that there ARE in fact problems. The goal is to find a solution.
I take it that's not your style, and you prefer to resort to ad hominem.

--Rooty
PS: Just as a pot shot, what Emerson did, although I hated it, was technically legal, unlike the Sponsorship Program...

PS2: Unless you are one of the peons from rabble.ca (or more specifically, their forum, babble)... in which case, your random outburst makes perfect sense

:D
sigh
But this is off topic
We should return to discussing the existence of crappy proposals and what to do about it

--Rooty

Defamation.
Heh heh.
Them's fightin' words missy.
Unless you are saying that my suggesting that the resolutions must have been written by NDP-types is an insult... which is interesting, given your defense of a party you probably don't know much about.
It's pretty hard to say that there are no problems with the resolutions we have. In fact, judging from this thread, it would seem to be the consensus that there ARE in fact problems. The goal is to find a solution.
I take it that's not your style, and you prefer to resort to ad hominem.

--Rooty

Your tone was quite clearly meant to be insulting by stating such. Your further post attacking the NDP proved that you have a general dislike for them. It was clear you intended it to be an insult.

I find it humorous that you claimed I know very little about the NDP though, especially after I showed a decent amount of knowledge about Canadian politics (Emmerson story is not being heard outside of Canada).

PS: Just as a pot shot, what Emerson did, although I hated it, was technically legal, unlike the Sponsorship Program...

And it's technically legal to have politicians that suck and only one non-white PM make it to caucus and to contradict your own platform and etc. Still is a problem with the party - especially after Harper campaigned with one of his claims being cleaning up government and opposing party jumping. Don't get me wrong, I think it shows a shitload of intelligence on Harper's side (for many many many reasons), but it still shows that no party is perfect.

PS2: Unless you are one of the peons from rabble.ca (or more specifically, their forum, babble)... in which case, your random outburst makes perfect sense

Never heard of it.

Apologies all around.
I meant no offense by parodizing MyTravellingHarem as an 8yearold cherub nor by insinuating that Frisbee liked honky-tonk music. It was meant to be a an amusing jab at the thread itself and not as a criticism of anyone personally. Not really a criticism of the thread either... Like I said in the offending post, it is unusual that the elders of this forum should take the time to actually explain the inner workings of the Proposal/Resolution system. Usually, they gruffly direct the inquisitor to the Rules stickie and are have no more to say. But this detailed explication of the process and highlight reel of the history of Resolutions (regardless of what kind of scores plays behind it) is really useful, even to those of us who are familiar with the process.
Again, a sincere apology to anyone who took any of my posts as a personal afront... unless you are an early 20th century American composer, in which case you are teh suX0rz and there are no two ways about it.

Apologies all around.
I meant no offense by parodizing MyTravellingHarem as an 8yearold cherub
Actually, given that I am now telling other people not to take offense over nothing, I probably should have kept my mouth shut instead of ranting at you.
But hey, double standards are working for me ;)

this detailed explication of the process and highlight reel of the history of Resolutions (regardless of what kind of scores plays behind it) is really useful, even to those of us who are familiar with the process.


I agree. It is very useful, random off topic interruptions notwithstanding.

(Emmerson story is not being heard outside of Canada).
Uh...
not true at all.

no party is perfect.
On that we are agreed

...rabble.ca...
Never heard of it.
<insert evil laughter here>
NDPer's and communists like to congregate there and rant about the evil big-C and small-c conservatives. They recently had a meltdown...
...
to put it extremely mildly.
I and my <a href="http://bloggingtories.ca">Blogging Tories</a> compatriots laughed at them from the outside for days.
But seriously, rabble thinks they are big time. That you have never heard of them is proof positive of their delusions.
And the NDP sucks. There are only two words that can describe Jack Layton (aside from used-car salesman)
Media whore.
Wanna see my impression?
It involves a lot of hand waving and repetition of the phrase "third option."

--Rooty
PS: is HTML not allowed or what?

PS: is HTML not allowed or what?

HTML has been disabled on Jolt ever since we moved here, as I recall. :)

That is one damn annoying feature, if I do say so.
And I do say so.

--Rooty

Again, a sincere apology to anyone who took any of my posts as a personal afront... unless you are an early 20th century American composer, in which case you are teh suX0rz and there are no two ways about it.
Heh-heh, I know I'm not offended. I found your post hilarious. No harm done on this end.

The vast majority of forums have HTML disabled. BBCode works just as well.

As for the bits on Canadian policies, as much as I love chuckling over the foibles of my neighbors to the north, it really has no place in this thread, or, indeed, this forum.

Amusing topic drift is one thing (ie: our Tom Waits idiocy a month or so ago). This, however, is not amusing. Take it to General.