NationStates Jolt Archive

Do we not all exist in this world of nation states or are we strictly isolated when a nation is a member of the UN from those who are not? Obviously, since we can co-exist in the same regions, we are part of the same world. Anyhow, since you UN member states are creating policy that all of your fellow members are often obliged to follow... I think the consequences often effect those of us who are not members. Therefore... I would like to make sure that communication/debate remains open between member and non-member nations -- even on the subject of UN proposals. It seems to me that the UN is supposed to be a transparent organization which can take into consideration opinions from outside it's bureaucracy. It would be nice if individual regions could set up their own larger decision making bodies but that would be too complex -- and some nations want to be totally independant! But we are all still effected by those involved with global groupthink and should still be able to communicate with them. This principle of free speech often seems to be questioned by UN members (making me even more suspicious of it) and, so, I would like to get everyone's opinion on this subject (as well as what the official policy is).

My opinion is that I welcome contributions by non-members, and won't judge based on whether someone is a member or not.

Doesn't mean I welcome all contributions by non-members.

My opinion is that I welcome contributions by non-members, and won't judge based on whether someone is a member or not.

Doesn't mean I welcome all contributions by non-members.

This seems just a tad bit contradictory. I guess you mean that you only want to hear from people with whom you agree?

No, I mean if someone makes a reasonable point, or a funny post, or in general something worth reading or responding to - no matter whether they disagree with me or not - then that's what matters, to me, in how I assess their posts.

If someone agrees with me wholeheartedly and is still a fucking retard, then I'll ignore them.

Hmm, I replied before I saw your poll troll options.

NO! Non-U.N savages are hardly even human! We should exterminate them!
I think you'd be hard pushed to find anyone who thinks this. If they do, they're jackasses.

No. They should only discuss things amongst themselves.
Again, not sure many people would agree with this. Certainly, most of the "UN regulars" have welcomed contributions from non-members. Some of them, in fact, are non-members.

Which leaves no reasonable "NO" options...

Yes! Because the U.N. is a corrupt organization that subjects the world to it's shallow groupthink.
How is it "corrupt"? The very nature of the Secretariat means it avoids corruption, or at least national basis. Furthermore, UN members comprise only about 30% of the world's population, so it can't subject "the world". And "groupthink"? Given there has never been a unanimous vote on a resolution, that repeals are constantly proposed and passed, that there are debates on every resolution, I don't see how. Besides, how the fuck do 30,000 nations groupthink when the vast majority of them have no contact with any others?

Can we abolish the U.N. so that everyone would have to make their own decisions?
No - it's been repeatedly said that this will never happen.

Which leaves no reasonable "YES" options...

OOC: THANK YOU, Gruenberg, for the grammatical correction. More people need to be aware of the relatively simple rules of the English language so that we can speak and write more intelligently than your average four-year-old.

I also agree that Frieks seems to be on a rather unjust crusade against the NSUN, especially given his poll options. I have one question for him or her, though. Why are you not in the NSUN if you care? I understand that one can care without being in, but I'd still like to know why you aren't.

The Wolf Guardians']Why are you not in the NSUN if you care?
Probably a puppet.

I don't get it. My nation's been contributing here since February, but up till the end of July, I wasn't even a member.

And I voted for all four poll options. Because I can.

The Wolf Guardians']Why are you not in the NSUN if you care? I understand that one can care without being in, but I'd still like to know why you aren't.

Oh, that's easy. If other U.N. members vote for something idiotic my nation of Frieks would be obliged to follow the new rule -- no matter how much the Frieks disagreed with it. No thanks. We can make up our own minds about what's best for us and we often don't care what the rest of the world thinks.

Oh, that's easy. If other U.N. members vote for something idiotic my nation of Frieks would be obliged to follow the new rule -- no matter how much the Frieks disagreed with it. No thanks. We can make up our own minds about what's best for us and we often don't care what the rest of the world thinks.
That's why one joins the UN and works with the rules.. As when you see a resolution pass that you don't like then the process calls for one to repeal it. Thus adding a little pain for a while in ones life until they repeal a bad resolution.

As far as listening to non members here.. I'm in a region with all non members and listen to them on issues that concern us all. As they often see things in them I might miss or not fully understand. So their input helps me. As six pair of eyes are better than my lazy two eyes at keeping up with things in here.

As for the poll we voted in jest to abolish the UN.. since we realy didn't see any that we liked and hated to not vote on one.

OOC: Was talking the other day to a guy about the current status of the world we live in and got into voting. He said he don't vote because he don't like what goes on. Then he continues to complain about everything going on.. Seems like you and him would get along well.

As when you see a resolution pass that you don't like then the process calls for one to repeal it.

I appreciate what you wrote but repealing an unjust resolution that never should have passed in the first place seems like a colossal waste of time and energy that would be better spent dealing with problems in other ways. Also... until it is repealed (assuming that it even will be repealed) your nation is subjected to the law of the unjust resolution.

That's why we strongly encourage proposals to be drafted here before they are sent for submission--so we can remove unjust resolutions. Very few proposals reach quorum (well, until very lately) if they have never been drafted here, and most proposals that are submitted with the help of the UN forum regulars can hardly be considered "unjust".

Oh, that's easy. If other U.N. members vote for something idiotic my nation of Frieks would be obliged to follow the new rule -- no matter how much the Frieks disagreed with it. No thanks. We can make up our own minds about what's best for us and we often don't care what the rest of the world thinks.

See, to me, that sounds like... you don't care about what happens to the UN. You have to take the bad with the good. From time to time, things will pass that some people don't like. If that happens, you can work to get it repealed. But, quite frankly, if you don't care to follow the rules established by the UN, then, in my opinion, you need to butt out. My opinion, mind you. You are basically... hmm... "drafting", in the automotive sense, on the UN. Riding our wake, as it were. Hitchhiking. And, it's not nice. Furthermore, it means... you're not at the wheel. So, once again, in my opinion, you need to either act as a guest, or get out of the car.

I feel for non-UN members, and it's your right to not be in, and I realize that our actions do, to some extent, affect non-UN nations, and, while you can make observations, you can't complain about things that don't go your way. Because, you're not on the boat. You can let go of the rope at any time you don't want to be there or if we're going a different direction than you want to, or you can give us hand signals to suggest a direction, but we're under no obligation to do as you want.

In short... chill out. There's no need to throw a fit over something you cannot change. I invite your casual input at any time, but you need to not act as though you have some authority while you do it. Because, you don't. You need to make such points as though you are an outsider making an observation. Which you are.

I really do mean no insult or injury of any kind. I just want you to know, in my opinion, why you are getting the kind of reception that you are.

*The opinions stated in this missive are not necessarily those of the Commonwealth. (lol)
**We apologize for the overuse of transportation metaphors.

My opinion is that I welcome contributions by non-members, and won't judge based on whether someone is a member or not.

Doesn't mean I welcome all contributions by non-members.

Mikitivity strongly encourages the participation of observer groups in any international forum. Though my government also feels the opinions voiced by observers should be labeled as such and perhaps restricted volume of opinions voiced. For example, my recommendations to the Council of Mayors really focuses on the opinions of the nations that will be impacted by UN resolutions ... I don't care to waste the Council's time on some threat coming from some society that isn't going to follow a resolution. By the same token, there have been times when the Most Glorious Hack has actually said it would honor a particular UN resolution, and those situtations are important enough for me to pass on.

Ultimately non-members' opinions should not outweigh or overpower the opinions of the nations that are most effected by UN resolutions, but there is some middle ground here (which may not be reflected in whatever random choices I plunked down for the purpose of the poll).

Howie T. Katzman

I agree with Mikitivity.

I appreciate what you wrote but repealing an unjust resolution that never should have passed in the first place seems like a colossal waste of time and energy that would be better spent dealing with problems in other ways. Also... until it is repealed (assuming that it even will be repealed) your nation is subjected to the law of the unjust resolution.Also if you learn to work with those unjust proposals you can better your nation instead of costing it in standings. This is all part of playing the game by learning to work with the blocks in front of you and getting over, around, or throught them and coming out okay.

I have no problem with non-UN members speaking their minds here. Although the resolutions don't affect their laws, they can sometimes affect them in other ways. For example, there was talk awhile back about shooting our trash into space, which would have affected space-nations whether they were in the UN or not.

OTOH, non-UN nations have no direct vote either. They can talk, but unless they can influence their delegate, they can't do anything to change our resolutions.

Oh, that's easy. If other U.N. members vote for something idiotic my nation of Frieks would be obliged to follow the new rule -- no matter how much the Frieks disagreed with it. No thanks. We can make up our own minds about what's best for us and we often don't care what the rest of the world thinks.
You know, this reminds me of those people who ask me, "You're a sovereigntist, why are you in the UN?" To which I reply, "The only way to change the UN, is from inside the belly of the beast."

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

You know, this reminds me of those people who ask me, "You're a sovereigntist, why are you in the UN?" To which I reply, "The only way to change the UN, is from inside the belly of the beast."

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

I firmly believe that this is true and even if Mikitivity (about 50% of the time) holds an opposing political view to many of the nations that are members of the National Soveriengty Organization, I must admit that the NSO and its members are highly regarded by most Mikitivian political scientists.

Howie T. Katzman

There are many non UN member nations that contribute to the organization as a whole through their insight and knowledge. (Some even join the UN eventually.) There are many UN member nations who have never been to the forum, never seen a sticky, and vote blindly on any resolution they see based purely on the title alone. I much perfer the former. I much hate the later.

See how the fates their forutune alot. For "A" is happy while "B" is not. :(

I have no problem with non-members coming here to take part in debates. they can add many things to discussion, and are just as able to point out problems as members are.

What I have a problem with is when people flaunt their non-membership. Those who only come here to gloat that they are still free from whatever idiotic thing the General Assembly just passed. In my opinion they are the equivalent of little kids singing out 'Nyah nyah, sucks to be you'.

I have yet to work out which of these categories Frieks falls under.

For our part, we welcome and value the participation of non-UN nations in these discussions. In fact, we can't help but wonder why this issue has been raised.

Ever since we joined this organization, non-member states have been participating in the discussions. Their views and comments, when presented in a constructive and civil manner, have always been accorded respect by the members. In fact, at least three proposals that we can recall were drafted by non-member nations and submitted "by proxy."

Constructive comment -- including constructive criticism -- is welcome. Arrogance, derisive and dismissive comments, criticisms of proposals based on a failure to carefully read them, and gratuitous insults directed at the Assembly and its members are not.

Patrick T. Olembe
Minister for Foreign Affairs

The fact so many nations have replied demonstrates clearly that non-UN nations are listened to.Do we not all exist in this world of nation states or are we strictly isolated when a nation is a member of the UN from those who are not?In metaphysical terms, yes we do. In Game mechanics rules, no we do not. Non-members do not get affected by resolutions in terms of their statistics.Anyhow, since you UN member states are creating policy that all of your fellow members are often obliged to follow... I think the consequences often effect those of us who are not members.I suppose they do, in roleplay terms. However, nobody has said you can't be a UN member. It's your choice. Therefore... I would like to make sure that communication/debate remains open between member and non-member nations -- even on the subject of UN proposals.You can post in here, it appears to be pretty open.It seems to me that the UN is supposed to be a transparent organization which can take into consideration opinions from outside it's bureaucracy.Yes, although you'd be amazing at the number of stupid opinions there are (from within and without the UN). It would be nice if individual regions could set up their own larger decision making bodies but that would be too complex -- and some nations want to be totally independant!That is confined to roleplay.But we are all still effected by those involved with global groupthink and should still be able to communicate with them.See previous comments.This principle of free speech often seems to be questioned by UN members (making me even more suspicious of it) and, so, I would like to get everyone's opinion on this subject (as well as what the official policy is).I think free speech is good. Offical policy is you can comment, based on the fact that you have posted, and people have replied. Just don't think your opinion or that of other non-members is an overriding concern. We have enough on our hands listening to full members.

Is that it?

I hope so.

I firmly believe that this is true and even if Mikitivity (about 50% of the time) holds an opposing political view to many of the nations that are members of the National Soveriengty Organization, I must admit that the NSO and its members are highly regarded by most Mikitivian political scientists.http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11557586&postcount=21

Hmm. I wonder what Mikitivian political scientists think of this NSO member? :p

I really don't have much to add, other than continue (or start) according respect to the people you have discussions with, and there's no reason respect cannot be accorded to you. Understand that misunderstandings will happen (because lordy lordy lordy they do) and that extra care must be taken to ensure that everyone knows what everyone else is saying, to avoid ballooning misunderstandings into shouting matches and hissy fits.

I think this is the first thread in a very long time where so many regulars (And Noggers, as it were) have been posting...



I um. Also voted for all of the options.

sorry...

I picked the first option on the poll because I hated all the options on the poll and thought that was half funny.

I firmly believe that this is true and even if Mikitivity (about 50% of the time) holds an opposing political view to many of the nations that are members of the National Soveriengty Organization,

Well on the majority of proposals you'd probably agree that they are absolute garbage:p .

As a non-member, I'm pretty sure that I've done a hell of a lot more then some member nations. Hell, I actually read the bloody proposals. I enjoy being able to voice my opinion and debate with members and non-members alike. I'd like to think that I've gained some form of respect from some very active member nations, as well as a few new friends.

I (mostly) agree with the honorable representatives from Gruenberg, The Wolf Guardians, Zeldon 6339 Nodlez, Mikitivity, Jey, Razat, Flibbleites, Tzorsland, Enn, Ausserland, Hirota, Omigodtheykilledkenny, Norderia, and Karmicaria. Non-members have every right to be heard in here, and we have every right to agree with them.

And we've boycotted the poll.

Enrique Lopez
Ambassador to the United Nations

Those who only come here to gloat that they are still free from whatever idiotic thing the General Assembly just passed. In my opinion they are the equivalent of little kids singing out 'Nyah nyah, sucks to be you'.
Frisbeeteria hasn't been a UN member in a couple of years, but I think I can safely say that I'm a heavy contributor to both this forum and the UN. Heck, I'm singlehandedly responsible for at least 1500 proposals failing to make quorum.


"Nyah nyah, sucks to be you." (if you're a shitty proposal writer, that is)

Frisbeeteria hasn't been a UN member in a couple of years, but I think I can safely say that I'm a heavy contributor to both this forum and the UN. Heck, I'm singlehandedly responsible for at least 1500 proposals failing to make quorum.


lawls

Heck, I'm singlehandedly responsible for at least 1500 proposals failing to make quorum.

And I am incredibly thankful. :D

For our part, we welcome and value the participation of non-UN nations in these discussions.

OOC: My kids have been grateful to those regions which share such attitudes. They have had to be grateful because I won't surrender Ardchoille's UN status, on the reasonable grounds that I was here first!, so my mob has had to make any UN comments via non-UN nations.

Sharing computers is not the only practical reason for being a non-UN nation, either. When I post from work, I do so as Ardchoilleans, to avoid any risk of being called for multi-ing because I know there are other NSers in the building.

And I am incredibly thankful. :D

As we all should be. :D

Oh, that's easy. If other U.N. members vote for something idiotic my nation of Frieks would be obliged to follow the new rule -- no matter how much the Frieks disagreed with it. No thanks. We can make up our own minds about what's best for us and we often don't care what the rest of the world thinks.

http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/wtf7an.jpg

http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/wtf7an.jpg
I was wondering when someone was going to play that card.

I was wondering when someone was going to play that card.

Couldn't help myself. :D

Heck, I'm singlehandedly responsible for at least 1500 proposals failing to make quorum.Only? :p

Only? :p

Methinks he was being modest. ;)

So the current plurality is:

"Yes! Because the U.N. is a corrupt organization that subjects the world to it's shallow groupthink." ?

I agree but I didn't expect the UN forum to decare itself corrupt :)

So the current plurality is:

"Yes! Because the U.N. is a corrupt organization that subjects the world to it's shallow groupthink." ?

I agree but I didn't expect the UN forum to decare itself corrupt :)

I wouldn't say that, some of us voted for all the options just because we could.

I wouldn't say that, some of us voted for all the options just because we could.

Um if you voted for all of them.... you had no impact on who got the plurarlity :) You did make multiple similar options seem more popular though. Or did I misunderstand? (It's happened before).

I wouldn't say that, some of us voted for all the options just because we could.

Yes, but the largest portion of votes has gone towards declaring that the UN is in fact corrupt.

It's open secret that you can buy the UN gnomes. The problem is they aren't even honest thieves, they won't stay bought!

Depends which gnomes you're talking about. I remember some rather bloodthirsty ones who would kill you before you got to try buying them.

It's open secret that you can buy the UN gnomes. The problem is they aren't even honest thieves, they won't stay bought!

You're just not using the right currency.*smiles knowingly*