NationStates Jolt Archive

Delegates have a responsibility to read UN proposals and approve them of they think they are fit for voting, regardless of whether they would vote for or against them.

Since we have 2070 delegates at the moment a proposal needs 125 approvals before it becomes a resolution for voting. I suspect that a vast majority of UN delegates are not fulfulling their duty and are completely ignoring the fact that proposals exist and need their approval to survive.

I suggest the game needs a way to make sure that delegates are doing their duty by making sure they visit the proposal page at least once a week, and maybe only once every 3 weeks in vacation mode. If they fail to do this they should automatically lose all their endorsements.

Any opinions about this? If you agree with me on the delegate issue but not on the enforcement part let me know what you think should be done!

Delegates have a responsibility to read UN proposals and approve them of they think they are fit for voting, regardless of whether they would vote for or against them.

False. They have the priveledge to do so, not the responsibility. The responsibility of the delegate is to serve those who endorsed him. In my case, I will endorse proposals for three reasons only:
1) I have participated in its drafting process and am impressed with its text and want to see it voted upon - assuming, of course, that it hasn't reached quarom
2) I am author or coauthor or the author or coauthor is a member of my region
3) I have been asked to endorse it by a member of my region (AKA: who I have responsibility to)

Since we have 2070 delegates at the moment a proposal needs 125 approvals before it becomes a resolution for voting. I suspect that a vast majority of UN delegates are not fulfulling their duty and are completely ignoring the fact that proposals exist and need their approval to survive.

Considering that we only have 4 pages of proposals today compared to the 15-20 pages of proposals we had a year ago, and considering that we have not yet broken the pace of resolutions hitting the floor missing only one day in the entire year while having a queue that has fluctuated between 0 and 5 proposals for the entire year with no discernable pattern, the ratio of proposals that make it to quarom are up so I would argue we are improving on activity.

I suggest the game needs a way to make sure that delegates are doing their duty by making sure they visit the proposal page at least once a week,

Why?

and maybe only once every 3 weeks in vacation mode.

I should put you on ignore for such a stupid comment.

VACATION MODE EXISTS BECAUSE SOMETIMES YOU JUST CAN'T LOG IN TWICE IN LESS THAN A MONTH. Say.....a month long camping trip or some other event.

It is the perogative of the members of the region to ensure that their delegate is doing his job, not the game.

If they fail to do this they should automatically lose all their endorsements.

Why?

Any opinions about this? If you agree with me on the delegate issue but not on the enforcement part let me know what you think should be done!

I think you should realize that half the people in the game are here to play the invader/defender game and couldn't give a shit about the proposals and resolutions.

Also, changes to game code belong on the Technical board.

I don't think 6% is too high a hurdle.

I'm in agreement with NewkLemon. It takes out about 6 or 7 hours of your time to get a proposal to quorum by tging delegates and giving them a link. I am fully for delegates losing their status if they don't consider the official current resolution or consider approvals.

Maybe there should be an option in the current resolution to vote for, against or not at all. If a delegate fails to select one of these options, say three or four times in a row, they should lose their delegate status.

Also, there should be an option on the proposal list saying, do not approve of any proposal and again, if a delegate does not approve of a proposal or does not select the option of not approving any proposal about three or four times in a row in uhhh, say every 6 months, they lose their delegate status. This way every proposal would get seen by all delegates and no telegramming would be needed for proposals.

The idea on the current resolution is to ensure that they at least consider the resolution. Anyone agree that delegates should be more efficient or does anybody agree with my suggestions?

Anyone agree that delegates should be more efficient or does anybody agree with my suggestions?
Yes; no.

I don't think 6% is too high a margin.
However, I do think there needs to be some way of explaining to people en masse the difference between a repeal and a new law. I am quite surprised at the high number of people who are ignorant of the difference.
Also, I do not think that NS players who decide to be UN Regional Delegates should be allowed to block telegrams regarding proposals or repeals. It's just rude.

--Rooty

In my experience telegramming, it's only underaged users who block TGs.

I am inclined to agree with you, judging by the content of the tg's I got back.

--Rooty

Also, there should be an option on the proposal list saying, do not approve of any proposal and again, if a delegate does not approve of a proposal or does not select the option of not approving any proposal about three or four times in a row in uhhh, say every 6 months, they lose their delegate status. This way every proposal would get seen by all delegates and no telegramming would be needed for proposals.

Oh god no. 95% of the proposals have the value of a sticky pad (and probably were drafted on one too) and to have to click each and every time one is proposed - ew

The idea on the current resolution is to ensure that they at least consider the resolution. Anyone agree that delegates should be more efficient or does anybody agree with my suggestions?

We already have a problem with too many people just reading the title and not the text and voting based upon that. You force people to vote, and it won't be a problem; it'll be a pandemic disaster.

I am inclined to agree with you, judging by the content of the tg's I got back.

--Rooty

No, I mean underaged users have their telegram boxes locked to prevent them from receiving TGs for their own protection.

We already have a problem with too many people just reading the title and not the text and voting based upon that. You force people to vote, and it won't be a problem; it'll be a pandemic disaster.

I couldn't agree more.

Ok. Some confusion here as to what I was referring to.
There are plenty of cases where there are whole classes playing this game. Teachers block their TG's. Makes sense to me.
But then you get the ^$%$#^% who send back some ignorant message, dispite being their region's Delegate to the UN that go something like this:
"Hey jackass! Don't telegram me anymore. I don't care about your stupid resolution blah blah blah curse curse curse."
or better yet (and I got this a lot)
"You cruel and inhuman person! How could you recommend removing a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT (yes folks, in caps)? Don't you care that people should be allowed to die? You are evil to the core for even thinking of repealing this truly honorable and noble resolution. A pox on thee! Never TG me again!" And of course, before I can respond and say why a repeal can't make euthanasia illegal, all TG's are blocked.
This is the kind of nonsense that makes me want to drop out of the UN already.

--Rooty

Oh, yeah, I see -- and have seen firsthand -- what you're saying. My advice? Screw them. They're not worth getting worked up over.

If people don't want to be spammed, I don't see why they shouldn't block you. I agree the pissy messages are unnecessary, though.

I don't see TGs regarding the UN as spam, not if they're being sent to UN delegates.

I don't think they are spam either.
Spam is more like "Get hard fast! Buy this viagra and be up all night! Cialis rules!"
etc...

--Rooty

Ya know i agree with you on both counts. Because Delagates play a major role and they need to be on top of there game.. Because i would urge game moderators to enforce the rules and begin to change the way that all Un Delagates operate..

I would be interested to see a moderators view on this because many people agree that there should be some kind of rules removing delegates from their position if they don't consider all proposals in the list at least.

I would be interested to see a moderators view on this because many people agree that there should be some kind of rules removing delegates from their position if they don't consider all proposals in the list at least.
They'll say no. Bear in mind, voting on resolutions isn't the only aspect of UN play - there's also invading/defending.

They'll say no. Bear in mind, voting on resolutions isn't the only aspect of UN play - there's also invading/defending.

But the delegates who are not very efficient are the ones who don't take part in the forums, so they should at least have time to consider proposals and the current resolution. By the looks of it, all these annoying delegates do is answer issues.

It is the perogative of the members of the region to ensure that their delegate is doing his job, not the game.Bingo. This is the most important thing to take out of this whole discussion. If more UN Members would pay attention to what their delegates were doing, this problem would fix itself.

Bingo. This is the most important thing to take out of this whole discussion. If more UN Members would pay attention to what their delegates were doing, this problem would fix itself.

If UN members don't give a damn about the UN, why should we be forcing them or their delegates to care? There's no logic to it.

Bingo. This is the most important thing to take out of this whole discussion. If more UN Members would pay attention to what their delegates were doing, this problem would fix itself.

If you hadn't noticed, the delegates who don't do their job properly have a region where the other UN members don't really care either.

But the delegates who are not very efficient are the ones who don't take part in the forums, so they should at least have time to consider proposals and the current resolution. By the looks of it, all these annoying delegates do is answer issues.
WZ Forums made 2 posts; Allied Iraq/Desert Storm Iraq I have never seen post. Yet between them, they've approved just about every proposal since I've been around. There are plenty of delegates who regularly check the proposal queue who never post on these forums; equally, I can think of several delegates who post on these forums a good deal, but don't really bother with proposals.

And bear in mind, someone becomes delegates by virtue of others wishes. When I was first a delegate, I didn't even know I could approve proposals. My friends just endorsed me because I was the oldest nation. You seem to be operating under the misapprehension that delegates are somehow obliged to actively check the proposal queue; "just answering issues" is what the overwhelming majority of NS nations do.

EDIT:

If you hadn't noticed, the delegates who don't do their job properly have a region where the other UN members don't really care either.
Nope. I'm about as active as they come, yet getting approvals out of every delegate I've served under in Malibu Islands has been like getting blood out of a stone. And that's not to criticise T&K - she, shock horror, has other things to do with her time.

I guess as a delegate, I should step into the fray. Here is the Handy Dandy guide to how I endorse proposals....

Repeals usually get an endorsement(especially useless laws.) However some repeals I haven't supported. The Repeal of the Universal bill of rights is one I have not endorsed. First, I don't agree with the arguements for the repeal, and second, The UBOR is useful as a basis to form other repeals, and I do agree that some rights are self evident(life,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). Proposals that strengthen defence, or allows a relaxing of gun laws usually get an endorsement. If a proposal amuses me(like the Atomic Cannon one) I'll endorse it. Also proposals that are drafted by members of the NSO, UN DEFCON, ACCEL, and FAIRTRADE, will usually get an endorsement(especially if some of the drafting is done on the various forums, where I can see how they come to pass, and have questions answered). Finally I have been known to endorse proposals that I might not agree with, but think they have enough merit in them, to at least get a fair shot at quorum, and debate.

The bribery starts later.:D

If you hadn't noticed, the delegates who don't do their job properly have a region where the other UN members don't really care either.

Then why in heaven's name should we care if they approve proposals or not? If they don't care about the NSUN, they're not going to care enough about proposals to evaluate them properly. Delegates are responsible to the members of their regions, not to this Assembly as a whole. They're elected by the members of the regions and the members of the regions can always remove them by withdrawing endorsements.

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

Inactivity on approving proposals doesn't bother me; the proposal list always full of shit anyway, and it often takes the longest time for the damned pages to load. When I was delegate, I checked the list maybe two, three times a month tops. The Palentine's policy was pretty much my own -- I endorsed most repeals, sovereignty-friendly proposals, proposals from nations I respect and admire, and stuff that gave me a giggle. When I got TGs about proposals, I would at least give them a look.

What does bother me is the attitude on the part of some delegates who become offended because someone has the nerve to contact them about UN matters -- which of course raises the question as to why they wanted to be a delegate in the first place. Also, those who lodge personal attacks against those who send them TGs about proposals they disagree with ("OMG!!!1111how can u propsoe this ur a fuckngi HOMOFOBE!!!!!11111111"). To my disappointment I've discovered that this level of immaturity isn't restricted to n00bs. :(

As far as my own region is concerned, the qualities I seek in a delegate are not necessarily faithful checking of the proposal list; since we are basically a region devoted to (silly) roleplay, I expect a modicum of activity on the forums, a faithful voting record, and that they keep up-to-date on UN business. And that they be funny. Side-note: The Palentine has told me he is tiring of his delegate job, so we will be selecting a successor in the coming weeks.

My region is a democracy. We vote on UN proposals on our off-site forum, and the delegate votes with the majority.

Then why in heaven's name should we care if they approve proposals or not? If they don't care about the NSUN, they're not going to care enough about proposals to evaluate them properly. Delegates are responsible to the members of their regions, not to this Assembly as a whole. They're elected by the members of the regions and the members of the regions can always remove them by withdrawing endorsements.

Lorelei M. Ahlmann
Ambassador-at-Large

I understand fully what you are saying. That is why I am saying that you should make a system where they must consider each proposal and resolution, but if they don't care, then they should be made to lose their delegate status.

Adolf, you're wrong. The job of a delegate is to do what his/her region wants. Their job is not to vote on proposals. Therefore, if their region doesn't care about each and every proposal/resolution, the delegate doesn't have to either.

I know again what you are saying, but this brings us back to the core of the problem with delegates:

That is that many of them and their region don't care at all about proposals or resolutions - they just like being delegates because it sounds 'cool'. This annoys many people who propose proposals because they have to take hours out of their day to get these proposals approved using telegrams.

I know again what you are saying, but this brings us back to the core of the problem with delegates:

That is that many of them and their region don't care at all about proposals or resolutions - they just like being delegates because it sounds 'cool'. This annoys many people who propose proposals because they have to take hours out of their day to get these proposals approved using telegrams.
And you are still not saying why they should be obliged to be a delegate for any reason other than it sounding cool.

Adolf, I understand that you think it's unfair- but the fact is, that's how the game works. If 2 nations in a region are in the UN, they get a delegate (assuming endorsement). That's an NS fact- and it doesn't matter if it's unfair to the resolution writters, becuase honstly, it's not their problem. The fact is, the delegates must do what their region wants, not what you as a proposal writter want.

Gruenberg, I was saying that most delegates who don't even look at proposals and resolutions only like being a delegate because it sounds 'cool', whereas I'm saying that all delegates should be a delegate because they like considering proposals and resolutions and discussing it with their region.

Anyway, I know that the truth is we can't change this inconvenience, but it is nice to rant about it every now and then.

Gruenberg, I was saying that most delegates who don't even look at proposals and resolutions only like being a delegate because it sounds 'cool', whereas I'm saying that all delegates should be a delegate because they like considering proposals and resolutions and discussing it with their region.
Once. A. Fucking. Gain.

WHY?

Why should they fit your definition of the responsibility of being a delegate? They are not obliged to be delegate for any reason more than it sounding cool, so why should they be judged by any standard other than that?

AB:
Within any region, a delegate can have the following purposes:
1) Moderate via boot command within the region, may also include responsibilities for reporting people who violate the game rules within the region (eg: reporting recruiters).
2) Effective head of state for the region. Not to be confused with UN affairs
3) Protector of the region: being able to defend against invasions, etc
4) Invade/grief a region: holding power away from the natives within the region. They may pick up delegacy several times a week.
5) Some similar position of authority. Something like some of the role-play training camps they've had, you could have a delegate being the equivelent of instructor
6) Casting the regional vote on UN resolutions. That is to say, making sure the delegate vote of what the region decides on their forum they wish to vote for as a group is cast.
7) UN ambassador. There's, maybe, a handful of regions that have that (and actually, mine doesn't).
8) Actually caring about proposals.

Oh look, approving proposals is just 1 of the 8 jobs a delegate may have.

Why should the delegate be expected to do them all?

Why should the delegate be expected to do them all?

Because, it seems, AB demands it.

I am a delagate. And i do need to speak not for the other delagates but i need to speak for myself... now i dont know what really is going on with these delagates who dont take the time out to vote for these proposals but they need to do what they are chosen to do.. every delagate has a duty to represent the people. reguardless if your scedule is busy online or offline..
i would come up with an idea if any delagate is not doing what they should be doing they should be removed from there post. plain and simple. now i had seen all of these resolutions and trust me when i say this there are alot of them. But it dont matter if there were over a million of them these delagates still have the duty to vote for or against. i would urge the un leadership to investigate these delagates. because enough is enough..

I'd say it depends on the region. If they elected their delegate to review and vote on proposals, then that's his job, and if he doesn't do it, the region should "fire" him (endorse someone who will do the job). However, if they elected the UN delegate to kick invader's behinds and don't care about UN proposals, then that's the region's choice.

But it dont matter if there were over a million of them these delagates still have the duty to vote for or against.

Why? Who gives them this duty? What makes this their responsibility.

And how is abstaination not taking that responsibility?

i would urge the un leadership to investigate these delagates. because enough is enough..

Why? Where, in UN law, did we pass a law mandating delegates vote on all resolutions?

I'd say it depends on the region. If they elected their delegate to review and vote on proposals, then that's his job, and if he doesn't do it, the region should "fire" him (endorse someone who will do the job). However, if they elected the UN delegate to kick invader's behinds and don't care about UN proposals, then that's the region's choice.


And there lies the only thing that copuld actually be done about it. If the Region for which they are delegate does not feel they are living up to their duties, they can remove their endorsements and give them to someone who will fit their paradigm of a good regional delegate. It is up to the individual regions to elect their delegates, and not up to the UN to decide if they are fir for the post. That being said, I full understand AB's need to rant about stuff. Sometimes that's all you can do and it can really ease some of your psychological tension.

i would urge the un leadership to investigate these delagates. because enough is enough..Hi. That would probably be me as I'm the most active Mod when it comes to UN affairs.

Now, when I'm not keeping the Proposal list somewhere between 2 and 5 pages (you're welcome), how do you propose I "investigate" these Delegates? Do I go to Proposals that are in the queue and kick out every Delegate that didn't vote for it? Do I make a list of every Proposal in the queue for a few weeks and start kicking? What about Delegates that weren't in charge until the most recent? What about Delegates who simply didn't like any of the Proposals? How am I supposed to learn these things? Am I supposed to psychically contact every Delegate and read their mind to see if they're actually reading the list and not voting? Did you actually think through this in the slightest?

Now, I don't know how many current Delegates remember a couple years ago, but I remember when the Proposal queue would sometimes be 20 or 30(!) pages long. The amount of time it takes to go through 10 pages (assuming you actually read the text) is ridiculous, I can't imagine sifting through 20 pages. Heh... my eyes glaze over after about 4 pages, and I'm not even judging quality; all I care about is legality.

The joy, the beauty of NationStates is the freedom we give the players. If you want to spend all your time in the General forum, go for it. If you want to role-play, go for it. If you want to go to town with the UN, go for it. If you want to play the region game, go for it. We let people do (within reason) whatever the want. The region invading game was never even thought of by the coders; it was created by players. Max has told me that the forums were an afterthought; but you know what? This game never would have gotten its popularity without the forums. Mainly because the forums let players coordinate and get together with other people who want to play the game the same way.

Forcing anything would destroy that. Hell, some dedicated forumites have a hard enough time with the one thing we do enforce: logging in to your nation once every 28/60 days. I've had to restore numerous nations from forumites who never visited their nation and signed directly into the forums. Can you imagine what would happen if we somehow found a way to make looking at Proposals manditory?

Delegates have a responsibility to read UN proposals and approve them of they think they are fit for voting, regardless of whether they would vote for or against them.

Since we have 2070 delegates at the moment a proposal needs 125 approvals before it becomes a resolution for voting. I suspect that a vast majority of UN delegates are not fulfulling their duty and are completely ignoring the fact that proposals exist and need their approval to survive.

I suggest the game needs a way to make sure that delegates are doing their duty by making sure they visit the proposal page at least once a week, and maybe only once every 3 weeks in vacation mode. If they fail to do this they should automatically lose all their endorsements.

Any opinions about this? If you agree with me on the delegate issue but not on the enforcement part let me know what you think should be done!

That is absolutely ridiculous. I am a delegate, and I do look at the proposal page. Perhaps no one endorses your proposal because it is not fit to be a Resolution. If you try to make this a Resolution, it will definitely fail. Don't ask a moderator either, because I've got moderators on my good side.

Consider this- Sometimes we just Don't have the time! I am very busy as a delegate, and do not have very much time to check the proposals. Therefore, I do not vote on every single proposal listed in the page. Some are stupid, and do not belong. Others belong, and I accept them. I admit that some delegates are getting pretty damn lazy, and it bothers me. Half of the snooty delegates I telegram don't respond. This is no reason to punish us, though! Some of us delegates actually WORK, believe it or not.

Thank you,
Apocalypse

Why? Who gives them this duty? What makes this their responsibility.

And how is abstaination not taking that responsibility?



Why? Where, in UN law, did we pass a law mandating delegates vote on all resolutions?


I agree with this one! There is no rule that forces us to do this, no law, it is aggravating, but we still have the right to ignore these proposals! I do not (see previous message), but you still have no right to try and do this!

If you want to be listened to, Klemon, then you must work hard as well! Go out there, and tell as many delegates as you can about your proposal. If they don't reply, bug them until they do. They also have no right to throw you under the bus and be snobbish bastards. Tell them you want an answer, and tell them like you mean it!

If they don't reply, bug them until they do. They also have [/color]no right to throw you under the bus and be snobbish bastards. Tell them you want an answer, and tell them like you mean it![/b]

That is called spamming and if they don't like it, they can report you and have your account deleted.

That is called spamming and if they don't like it, they can report you and have your account deleted.


Yes, but that is a common problem with them. You'd be surprised on how many people I've contacted, and gotten silence in return. Try contacting eleven people, and have only two talk back. I actually did that.

By the way, I was supporting your case. Thanks for returning the favor.:mad:

I know again what you are saying, but this brings us back to the core of the problem with delegates:

That is that many of them and their region don't care at all about proposals or resolutions - they just like being delegates because it sounds 'cool'. This annoys many people who propose proposals because they have to take hours out of their day to get these proposals approved using telegrams.


Don't be such an arrogant hog.

We are delegates because we were chosen by our people. How long have you been in NationStates? Don't you know we aren't delegates because we think it's cool? We think it is our duty, and we have many other things to do in our region than accept some of these proposals. Read my past few messages, and you'll see what I'm talking about.

I both agree and disagree with this statement:
I disagree because this is not a topic that should be brought up with the players of the game but rather the makers of the game.
But i do agree that UN delegates have the responsibility to check the forum and the newest threads.
There should be a punishment for a delgate that does not check them forum and block tgs but that should come from the people within their region.
Sir_Laugh_alot

Yes, but that is a common problem with them. You'd be surprised on how many people I've contacted, and gotten silence in return. Try contacting eleven people, and have only two talk back. I actually did that.

I understand it can be annoying. Doesn't make it alright to spam them.

By the way, I was supporting your case. Thanks for returning the favor.:mad:

If you're going to offer advice that is actually damaging to the person being advised, I truly can't support your position. Your advice would have resulted in AB receiving at least a warning if not a deletion.

I would love to be on here often, but I have things to do that can get in the way at times. However I am happy to help when I can. :)

I cannot believe this is comng up again.

The current Delegate's needed is 120 or so. A lot lower than the 160 or so when I first joined the game.

The evidence, and I have seen it, does not suggest it is harder to get proposals to the floor and that many resolutions are being voted on. When was the last time we had a long break between resolutions? I cannot remember.

Yes you may need to go on a telegram campaign to get the endorsements but there are many organisations who do do that and are successful.

ACCEL being one of them (http://accel.jactivism.com/forums)

I would love to be on here often, but I have things to do that can get in the way at times. However I am happy to help when I can. :)


All three posts worth of it. W00T.

All three posts worth of it. W00T.
Bad Cluich.

Bad Cluich.

It's the weekend. I'm naughty. ;)