NationStates Jolt Archive

UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #37

World Heritage List
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.

Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: Woodchipping
Proposed by: Van dieman land

Description: Recognising that all nations share a common global environment;

Recognising that sites of pristine environmental significance should be protected for all people; and

Recognising that a lack of environmental protection protocols currently exists:

It is proposed that a World Heritage List be established. All UN nations may voluntarily list sites of environmental significance both internally and globally. Listed sites would be protected from logging, mining and other environmentally-damaging activities.

Votes For: 9,402
Votes Against: 7,623

Implemented: Sat Nov 15 2003

Repeal of Resolution 37

This REPEAL RECOGNIZES the attempt of the author of this resolution on creating a World Heritage List.

URGES that another resolution be created as quickly as possible to protect world heritage sites.

However, this repeal STATES that this resolution for a World Heritage List is full of LOOPHOLES.

NOTED that this resolution is under the heading of wood-chipping and not under all industries which can provide a loop hole for Uranium mining as well as other industries, that are not effected by this resolution even though stated in its paragraph.

Notes that the World Heritage List was proposed to be created. There is no quidelines or indication on what standards a World Heritage List should be based on.

Notes that what qualifies as a pristine place, is it just a forested park area, or could it be oceanic or mountainous, and does it need a standard of size.

Finally, that 'if' a World Heritage List was created, it was only voluntarily on such an important issues. Therefore if one nation said that their was a pristine area in another area, it doesn't state if that area should be protected even if the nation where this area resides in doesn't consider it a pristine area.

OOC: Just stop proposing stuff for a bit -- please. There's already a repeal of this (http://s15.invisionfree.com/UN_DEFCON/index.php?showtopic=63) in the works.

OOC: Fine I will just resign if this is how an organization like this works.

Any suggestions besides posting that i have too many proposals.

OOC: Just stop proposing stuff for a bit -- please. There's already a repeal of this in the works.

Ok, not all of us are members of UN DEFCON. From my perspective, this issue hasn't really been looked at extensively since March. Do you mind giving us a heads up when it goes back up, because I DO support a repeal of this resolution

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

Repeal of Resolution 37

This REPEAL RECOGNIZES the attempt of the author of this resolution on creating a World Heritage List.

God, I hate this style - especially when a document refers to itself. It makes it seem bland and dries up the throat. Eugh.

Try "RECONGIZING the intent of the auther...." Simpiler, cleaner, and capital letter in the middle of a sentence are annoying. Either caps the first word, or caps nothing.

URGES that another resolution be created as quickly as possible to protect world heritage sites.

Maybe try "URGING for a replacement to be created as quickly as possible ...." The way it's worded is awkward.

However, this repeal STATES that this resolution for a World Heritage List is full of LOOPHOLES.

Just....STATING

NOTED that this resolution is under the heading of wood-chipping and not under all industries which can provide a loop hole for Uranium mining as well as other industries, that are not effected by this resolution even though stated in its paragraph.

1) You changed tense. Don't
2) I dislike the argument. Questionable at best

Notes that the World Heritage List was proposed to be created. There is no quidelines or indication on what standards a World Heritage List should be based on.

Excellent. Though this would be a much better time to caps the first word

Notes that what qualifies as a pristine place, is it just a forested park area, or could it be oceanic or mountainous, and does it need a standard of size.

"does it need" -> "doesn't need"

Finally, that 'if' a World Heritage List was created, it was only voluntarily on such an important issues. Therefore if one nation said that their was a pristine area in another area, it doesn't state if that area should be protected even if the nation where this area resides in doesn't consider it a pristine area.

False. It actually works the other way and is why UN DEFCON took over the repeal rather than, say, GTT. Technically speaking, anyone can declare any chip of land in any nation and place it on the World Heritage list without any requirement for consent from the nation nor, really, any concern for the wishes of the nation. I could add all your forests to the world heritage list so that the only way you could access lumber is through import - which might be beneficial to my businesses.

Sick, really.

NOTED that this resolution is under the heading of wood-chipping and not under all industries which can provide a loop hole for Uranium """mining"""" as well as other industries, that are not effected by this resolution even though stated in its paragraph..

Believe you need to take a relook at R37 especialy this part of it.

It is proposed that a World Heritage List be established. All UN nations may voluntarily list sites of environmental significance both internally and globally. Listed sites would be protected from logging, """mining"""" and other environmentally-damaging activities.

Also believe that the final words in this part of R37 would cover anything else. So now why do we need to repeal one that has what you say it don't have in it.

Do agree it needs repeal but not for those reasons you would note in this one. As suggested work on the idea that their are no restriction to keep say Nation A from putting all of Nation B on this list so Nation B has no recourse in protecting it's own land and also on how it might use it. As once on list it closed to them and anyone else..

OOC: Fine I will just resign if this is how an organization like this works.Timor, a lot of newcomer nations go through this. When they realise that their vision of the UN and policies is not in line with some of the established regulars, they resign. That's a shame, because the few that do stick around tend to do pretty well.

I have to praise your enthusiasm and your effort put into proposals you have drafted thus far, they reflect you well and suggest you may be an asset to the UN in the future. At this time however, I suggest you take the time to watch how the UN works and develop your understanding.

Do you have to listen to me, or Cluich, or anyone else? Not really. Do you have to limit yourself to one proposal at a time? Not really.

I can't speak for Cluich, but I aim to supply some friendly advice to a nation I think might be an asset to the UN. You are free to ignore if you wish.

Note: Don't get put off by the tone of some of the regulars on here, they were newbies too once, put off by regulars before them.

Ok, not all of us are members of UN DEFCON. From my perspective, this issue hasn't really been looked at extensively since March. Do you mind giving us a heads up when it goes back up, because I DO support a repeal of this resolution


Fair enough. Really hadn't thought it'd been that long since we'd trashed the WHL here. I'll be submitting the repeal again very soon, though, and look forward to your support.

<snip>
Of course the majority of ^ these issues were grammatical and format errors. So take this as encouragement...I think.

Just a note though, I've been in the UN over a year and a half and only just started drafting proposals. Although that was out of choice.

Repeal of Resolution 37

RECOGNIZING the resolution's honourable attempt at creating a World Heritage List.

URGING that another resolution be created as quickly as possible to protect world heritage sites.

STATING that this resolution is full of LOOPHOLES.

Noting this resolution is under the heading of wood-chipping and not under all industries which can provide a loop hole for Uranium mining industries.

Notes that the World Heritage List was proposed to be created. There is no quidelines or indication on what standards a World Heritage List should be based on.

Notes that what qualifies as a pristine place, is it just a forested park area, or could it be oceanic or mountainous, and doesn't need a standard size.

If a World Heritage List was created, it is only voluntarily on such an important issue.

Finally, with allowing one nation to declare in another nation 'a pristine area' without asking for consent from the second nation, it can be used as a away for nation one to use the World Heritage List as a way to cut off foreign forestry industries and making them turn to their 'exports'. Which may be benefitical to the first nation's lumber industry and has nothing to do with environmental protection at all.

Quick glance:

If you go with -ing (Recognizing, stating), stay with -ing
If you go with -es (Recognizes, states), stay with -es

If you go with first word all caps, keep it that way
If you don't, don't do it for any.

And loopholes really isn't important enough to get an all caps status.

The world heritage list was created - as Cluich for the link.

I'll go more in-depth later.

The world heritage list was created - as Cluich for the link.

I wasn't the one who created it, but here is the link (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/World_Heritage_List).

OOC: Just stop proposing stuff for a bit -- please. There's already a repeal of this (http://s15.invisionfree.com/UN_DEFCON/index.php?showtopic=63) in the works.
That may be so, but not everyone knows about that. When I posted my proposal a few weeks ago to do this you pointed the same out to me, but I had no knowledge of your proposal at the time I posted mine. The same is probably true of this one. Give him a break and accept that when your proposals are developed on a forum that not everyone is a member of that sometimes others will try to do something about the problems in the UN with or without your approval.

I wasn't the one who created it,

Yeah - but you're the one that has it on favorites :p

That may be so, but not everyone knows about that. When I posted my proposal a few weeks ago to do this you pointed the same out to me, but I had no knowledge of your proposal at the time I posted mine. The same is probably true of this one. Give him a break and accept that when your proposals are developed on a forum that not everyone is a member of that sometimes others will try to do something about the problems in the UN with or without your approval.

Mine was posted here, too, but it's easier for me to find it on the DEFCON forum than it is using Jolt's shitty search function.

And yes, 'tis true, FL. How could I not bookmark that bad boy? :D

Mine was posted here, too, but it's easier for me to find it on the DEFCON forum than it is using Jolt's shitty search function.

Google works......

So is my repeal dead or can it be workable??