NationStates Jolt Archive

OOC: Here’s yet another idea for a possible resolution, which I put together during a few tea-breaks & dinner-hours at work. The main point about which I’m currently undecided is the correct Category in which to place it: SOme re-wording might be necessary to make it fit, but do you think that the fact it this tries to place some limits on people’s behaviour makes it ‘Moral Decency’ -- even though some people here might dispute whether the bad sportsmanship that would [hopefully] be reduced by it is actually a “right” -- or should the fact that as it will hopefully lead to better behaviour both within & between nations it will hopefully allow some reductions [however slight those might be] in police/military spending make ‘Global Disarmament’ more appropriate instead? ;)


Good Sportsmanship

Category: Moral Decency
Strength: Mild

Description: The United Nations,

APPROVING of the fact that sporting activities of various kinds are common in many nations, often on a competitive basis, and that this situation has led to the existence of various international sporting contests too,

RECOGNISING that different individuals and peoples may approach sporting contests with different attitudes, which may influence their behaviour in those contests, and that how they behave in contests within their own nations is likely to have a strong influence on how they behave in international contests as well,

REALISING that the conduct of participants and audiences in sporting contests within nations may not only reflect but also help to shape patterns of public behaviour within those nations, possibly affecting the crime rates there,

REALISING that the conduct of participants and audiences in international sporting contests may influence foreigners’ views about their nations, so that it could improve or worsen international relations and in extreme cases bad behaviour might even help to trigger the beginnings of wars,

BELIEVING that, however “national” a matter the reduction of crime rates within the separate nations might be, the promotion of good relations between nations and thus reducing the likelihood of international wars is a good and proper role for this organisation,

DEFINING the term ‘good sportsmanship’, for the purpose of this resolution, as meaning behaviour during sporting contests that is likely to promote good relations between the rival sides and their supporters, and within or between the nations to which these belong, such as_ trying to play within the spirit of the rules as well as their letter, refereeing fairly, accepting that sometimes the referees may honestly make mistakes or simply fail to notice incidents, politeness towards opponents both inside and outside the sporting events’ venues, and showing magnanimity in victory and good grace in defeat,

DEFINING the term ‘bad sportsmanship’, for the purpose of this resolution, as meaning behaviour during sporting contests that is likely to promote worsened relations between the rival sides and their supporters, and within or between the nations to which these belong, such as_ trying to exploit loopholes in the letter of the rules although that means going against their spirit, breaking the rules if getting away with this seems likely, biased refereeing, arguing with the referees (even if they seem to have made mistakes, or not to have noticed incidents), rudeness towards opponents both inside and outside the sporting events’ venues, gloating in victory, and whining in defeat;

STRONGLY URGES nations to practice and promote good sportsmanship, and to refrain from and try to reduce bad sportsmanship, in both internal and international contests.

= currently just under 2’800 characters…

Update: Changed to submitted version, by the identification of its Category and the insertion of the two words that I've placed in bold italics here...

Moral Decency seems okay. (Is restriction of free speech covered there or in Political Stability?) However, does this proposal mandate anything? Good idea, lack of action.

--the Plutonian ambassador.

Moral Decency seems okay. (Is restriction of free speech covered there or in Political Stability?) However, does this proposal mandate anything? Good idea, lack of action.

--the Plutonian ambassador.

(still OOC): It has its 'STRONGLY URGES' clause, which could be enough action for legality...

(still OOC): It has its 'STRONGLY URGES' clause, which could be enough action for legality...

OOC: I do not think that a resolution on such issues can be formulated stronger than "strongly urges" without being regarded as too intrusive.

OOC: Alright. Its a well written draft. I'll give you that and I think moral decency is probably the best category. However, I do not think that sportsmanship is an issue of international concern, or even if it is...it isn't such an issue that legislation is absolutely required.

Most real world nations cant legislate "good sportsmanship" in their own nations and I doubt that it would be possible to do here either.

Sportsmanship is something that I think is internal to a person, rather than external. Good sportsmanship stems from a correct attitude regarding athletic competition. Sport is for fun (or at least it is for most people as the actual amount of people that are good enough to be professional footballers or whatever is extremely low) and when it ceases to be fun it has lost its meaning.

And the strongly urges is definitely enough action to be legal under a mild strength.

That said....

IC:
Go write an Essay and quit wasting the UN's Time.

Antranig Zylovnov
Zyrwickian Deputy UN Ambassador.

OOC: Given we have disagreed quite a bit recently, I feel I should start off with a compliment to show no hard feelings. You probably come up with more, interesting, if bizarrely punctuated, proposal ideas than anyone else in the UN forum.

*light applause*

BUT

Maybe it's time to get one, just one, of them to quorum? It could be Piracy. It could be Commercial Law. Or this one, or Pride and Prejudice. Or the Democratic Education Aid one. Or the never-seen replacement for the UN Drug Act or the never-seen replacement for Help Prevent Ozone Depletion. Or Extradition. Or yet another new one. It doesn't really matter. But, I'm sorry, until you demonstrate the ability to draft an interesting proposal and get it to quorum - and yes, I do appreciate you have time constraints that limit your ability to conduct a TG campaign - I'm increasingly reluctant to comment on drafts, because I don't see the point: they're not going anywhere.

Sportsmanship? Are you serious? What's next? A proposal urging good table manners? I can see it now: "STRONGLY URGES that people not chew with their mouths open or talk with food in their mouths."

Ailyn Vel (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/images/Ailyn.jpg)
New Vandalian Ambassador to the UN

OOC: I do not think that sportsmanship is an issue of international concern, or even if it is...it isn't such an issue that legislation is absolutely required.

OOC: Not absolutely, I agree, but posting this draft to see just how people might feel about the possibility seemed worthwhile... and have you ever heard of the 'World Cup War' that was fought between the RL nations of Honduras and El Salvador back in the late 960s or early 1970s? Apparently tension between those countries was already quite high, for various reasons, and the arguments that arose from a disputed decision during a qualifying match for the next World Cup turned out to be enough to trigger an actual conflict...


OOC: Given we have disagreed quite a bit recently, I feel I should start off with a compliment to show no hard feelings. You probably come up with more, interesting, if bizarrely punctuated, proposal ideas than anyone else in the UN forum.

*light applause*

Thank you.

BUT

Maybe it's time to get one, just one, of them to quorum? It could be Piracy. It could be Commercial Law. Or this one, or Pride and Prejudice. Or the Democratic Education Aid one. Or the never-seen replacement for the UN Drug Act or the never-seen replacement for Help Prevent Ozone Depletion. Or Extradition. Or yet another new one. It doesn't really matter. But, I'm sorry, until you demonstrate the ability to draft an interesting proposal and get it to quorum - and yes, I do appreciate you have time constraints that limit your ability to conduct a TG campaign - I'm increasingly reluctant to comment on drafts, because I don't see the point: they're not going anywhere.

That's fair enough, and I'm glad that you do recognise the existence of those time constraints. However I'll have seven consecutive weeks off from work in the near future (one of the main benefits of working in a school... ;)), and plan on trying at least a partial TG campaign -- if not a full one -- for one or another of these proposals then. Just which proposal that will actually be depends in part on the responses that I get to these drafts now, although whether I can talk any organised group into helping campaign for any of them might also be a factor. The potential alternatives for the 'UN Drug Act' and 'Help Prevent Ozone Depletion' aren't on my current list of possibilities, however, because I just don't feel like starting a process that would require two TG campaigns in a row -- for a repeal and then the relevant replacement -- rather than just one...

We just don't understand the real point of this proposal. Wouldn't an urging of good sportsmanship in "internal and international contests" be more appropriate in the rulebooks of the leagues which govern these contests? We don't see a need for international legislation on this matter.

Vance Aceon
Deputy Presiding Jevian UN Representative

We just don't understand the real point of this proposal. Wouldn't an urging of good sportsmanship in "internal and international contests" be more appropriate in the rulebooks of the leagues which govern these contests? We don't see a need for international legislation on this matter.

Vance Aceon
Deputy Presiding Jevian UN Representative

So you didn't actually read the second to fifth clauses of the preamble?

So you didn't actually read the second to fifth clauses of the preamble?

I read it, and I still don't see the need for a UN resolution on hooliganism, even with respect to international contests.

It is well-written, though. I'll give you that.

Ailyn Vel (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/images/Ailyn.jpg)
New Vandalian Ambassador to the UN

OOC: Here’s yet another idea for a possible resolution, which I put together during a few tea-breaks & dinner-hours at work. The main point about which I’m currently undecided is the correct Category in which to place it: Some re-wording might be necessary to make it fit, but do you think that the fact it this tries to place some limits on people’s behaviour makes it ‘Moral Decency’ -- even though some people here might dispute whether the bad sportsmanship that would [hopefully] be reduced by it is actually a “right” -- or should the fact that as it will hopefully lead to better behaviour both within & between nations it will hopefully allow some reductions [however slight those might be] in police/military spending make ‘Global Disarmament’ more appropriate instead? ;)It seems to me that "promoting good sportsmanship" and "reducing bad sportsmanship" would require an increase in police spending to quell soccer and basketball riots; therefore, this would be International Security, not GD. Although Moral Decency is a better fit. If you ever plan on getting this to quorum, that is.

So you didn't actually read the second to fifth clauses of the preamble?

Yes, we read them. Suffice it to say that we don't RECOGNISE, REALISE, REALISE, or BELIEVE those things.

Vance Aceon
Deputy Presiding Jevian UN Representative

It seems to me that "promoting good sportsmanship" and "reducing bad sportsmanship" would require an increase in police spending to quell soccer and basketball riots; therefore, this would be International Security, not GD. Although Moral Decency is a better fit.

If one concentrates solely on suppressing the outward manifestations of bad sportsmanship the, yes, it quite probably would require that added expenditure: I was hoping that nations would also tackle the underlying causes of that behaviour, however, by means such as getting celebrities (especially sportsmen) to set good examples in this respect and/or -- although I couldn't actually say so, because of potentially illegal contradiction of Gruen's blocker on education -- by including education in good sportsmanship within 'physical education' classes & organised sports at the school level (thus hopefully catching people before they develop bad habits in that respect...) which would hopefully lead to more polite societies that then required less policing.

Yes, we read them. Suffice it to say that we don't RECOGNISE, REALISE, REALISE, or BELIEVE those things.

Vance Aceon
Deputy Presiding Jevian UN Representative


[still OOC]

So, you think that_
Everybody approaches sporting contest with the same attitudes, which will not influence their behaviour in those contests, and that how they behave in contests within their own nations is unlikely to have a strong influence on how they behave in international contests as well,
The conduct of participants and audiences in sporting contests within nations will neither reflect nor help to shape patterns of public behaviour within those nations, and thus will have no possible effects on the crime rates there,
The conduct of participants and audiences in international sporting contests will not influence foreigners’ views about their nations, and so could not improve or worsen international relations or (in extreme cases) possibly help to trigger the beginnings of wars,
And the promotion of good relations between nations and thus reducing the likelihood of international wars is NOT a good and proper role for this organisation.

I see...

*shakes head from side to side in disbelief*

The conduct of participants and audiences in sporting contests within nations will neither reflect nor help to shape patterns of public behaviour within those nations, and thus will have no possible effects on the crime rates there,

No, we hardly think that an angry winger in a soccer game will somehow make people commit murder. Go ahead and show us videos of angry fans storming soccer fields, but we simply see this as an extremely hasty generalization which doesn't need to be streamlined by the United Nations as it is very likely an extremely rare case for angry sportmen to affect crime rates in a nation at anything near a significant level.

The conduct of participants and audiences in international sporting contests will not influence foreigners’ views about their nations, and so could not improve or worsen international relations or (in extreme cases) possibly help to trigger the beginnings of wars,

NO. We don't agree with this at all either. We would like to think that our neighboring countries are much more intelligent than to make generalizations about the whole populace of a nation from the behavior of its fans at a sporting event. And wars?! If anyone wants to start a war over whether the basketball went in the hoop or not, we'll kindly withdraw from the competition and play amongst just the Jevians.

We still see no reason for this piece of legislation. At least in all of the sports leagues that Jevians play in, good sportsmanship is quite noticably promoted through various rules and rewards for those who follow the rules. When the rules are not followed, the players are penalized severely. Why should the United Nations interfere with these rules, especially if they are already in place?

Vance Aceon
Deputy Presiding Jevian UN Representative

If one concentrates solely on suppressing the outward manifestations of bad sportsmanship the, yes, it quite probably would require that added expenditure: I was hoping that nations would also tackle the underlying causes of that behaviour, however, by means such as getting celebrities (especially sportsmen) to set good examples in this respect and/or -- although I couldn't actually say so, because of potentially illegal contradiction of Gruen's blocker on education -- by including education in good sportsmanship within 'physical education' classes & organised sports at the school level (thus hopefully catching people before they develop bad habits in that respect...) etc etc.And in your mind that would constitute a Global Disarmament measure? You have several choices if you wanted to promote "good sportsmanship" on the part of soccer fans: you can initiate public-service programs (like the ones you described) aimed at getting sports fans to behave themselves. That's Moral Decency. You can ban alcohol at sporting events (although in my nation such a measure would likely cause more riots than it prevented). That's Moral Decency. You can increase security at sporting events. That's either International Security or Political Stability.

There is no way on Earth this can possibly be considered GD -- unless, of course, you were to slip in language instructing nations to confiscate the officers' weapons and tell them instead to lead everyone in great big group hugs as they left the stadium.

So, Moral Decency or International Security. And it leans toward the former.

Sportsmanship? Are you serious? What's next? A proposal urging good table manners? I can see it now: "STRONGLY URGES that people not chew with their mouths open or talk with food in their mouths."

[In the NSUN Nunciate of the Eternal Kawaii.]

"I'm not sure it would be practical, your grace."

"But seriously! This is a good idea. The Cute One knows how many diplomatic dinners I've had to attend since becoming Nuncia, and have you SEEN the way some of the representatives here eat? It's horrifying!"

"True, but even so, don't you think your grace's time would be better spent on proposals with a decent chance of passage? I'm afraid a 'good table manners' resolution wouldn't fly, especially among the NatSov crowd."

"Well...there's still this one. Maybe if governments can persuade their people to behave at sporting events, they'll be more inclined to support promoting better manners elsewhere?"

"It's a start, your grace."

No, we hardly think that an angry winger in a soccer game will somehow make people commit murder. Go ahead and show us videos of angry fans storming soccer fields, but we simply see this as an extremely hasty generalization which doesn't need to be streamlined by the United Nations as it is very likely an extremely rare case for angry sportmen to affect crime rates in a nation at anything near a significant level.

The worse the players misbehave on the pitch, the worse the manner in which their supporters are likely to respond to the rival teams' supporters and thus the more likely riots -- in which people could (and in RL, sometimes "do") get killed -- are to occur... And that's not just a "hasty" generalisation, by the way, but a view that in my case is based on several decades of watching the news and that is shared by quite a few other people too.
That this doesn't "need" to be tackled by the UN, perhaps no: That's one of the reasons why I only drafted this as a 'mild' proposal -- with its only operative clause at just the 'STRONGLY URGES' level -- rather than as a more binding one...
Angry sportsmen affecting crime rates: As I said in the actual proposal, but apparently didn't make clear enough, I contend that encouraging good sportsmanship amongst nation's populations as a whole (and not just amongst professional sportsmen) might well have the useful side-effect of encouraging generally more polite & law-abiding attitudes within those societies.

We would like to think that our neighboring countries are much more intelligent than to make generalizations about the whole populace of a nation from the behavior of its fans at a sporting event. And wars?! If anyone wants to start a war over whether the basketball went in the hoop or not, we'll kindly withdraw from the competition and play amongst just the Jevians. Fine. Maybe your nation is so fortunate as to have neighbours that really are all such clear-thinking good sports... but this proposal isn't just about you & your neighbours, is it?

And in your mind that would constitute a Global Disarmament measure? You have several choices if you wanted to promote "good sportsmanship" on the part of soccer fans: you can initiate public-service programs (like the ones you described) aimed at getting sports fans to behave themselves. That's Moral Decency. You can ban alcohol at sporting events (although in my nation such a measure would likely cause more riots than it prevented). That's Moral Decency. You can increase security at sporting events. That's either International Security or Political Stability.

There is no way on Earth this can possibly be considered GD -- unless, of course, you were to slip in language instructing nations to confiscate the officers' weapons and tell them instead to lead everyone in great big group hugs as they left the stadium.

So, Moral Decency or International Security. And it leans toward the former.

I was looking at the potential and hoped-for long-term consequences: The idea there was that strengthened cultural emphasis on Good Sportsmanship => societies that are generally more polite & law-abiding in general => less in the way of crime (especially violent crime) and perhaps even fewer wars too => fewer (& less heavily armed) police -- and maybe smaller armed forces, too -- necessary => Global Disarmament... but I can see your argument about higher levels of policing being needed in the short term, as well.
'Moral Decency' was the category towards which I was leaning personally, anyway, I just thought that maybe somebody might argue for GD instead on the basis of a sequence such as I've given here.

The idea there was that strengthened cultural emphasis on Good Sportsmanship => societies that are generally more polite & law-abiding in general => less in the way of crime (especially violent crime) and perhaps even fewer wars too => fewer (& less heavily armed) police -- and maybe smaller armed forces, too -- necessary => Global Disarmament...I think that's riding the logic and causality train a few stops too far.

'Moral Decency' was the category towards which I was leaning personallyProbably your best bet here.

That this doesn't "need" to be tackled by the UN, perhaps no: That's one of the reasons why I only drafted this as a 'mild' proposal -- with its only operative clause at just the 'STRONGLY URGES' level -- rather than as a more binding one...
Make up your mind, man. Either this is worth the UN tackling, in which case it should tackle it, or it isn't. "STRONGLY URGING" is about as effective at tackling an issue as threatening someone with a wet lettuce. All this would do is block anything that might actually be effectual.

"STRONGLY URGING" is about as effective at tackling an issue as threatening someone with a wet lettuce.

*throws a very large head of sopping wet lettuce at the Gobbannaean delegate*

Give the man a break. He's wearing a penguin costume, for heaven's sake.

~Dr. Jules Hodz

Give the man a break. He's wearing a penguin costume, for heaven's sake.
[STAGE WHISPER]Don't mention the penguin costume. I did it once, but I think I got away with it.[/STAGE WHISPER]

*pulls out a bullhorn/megaphone*

"OKAY! I WON'T MENTION THE PENGUIN COSTUME!!!"

*puts away bullhorn*

"But I have compassion on the poor soul required to wear it. Cruel and Unusual Punishment, that is."

I don't understand.


How is this a matter for the United Nations?

Uh... what?

Are we even seriously discussing this?

You know, I oughta revoke your NSO membership for even considering this to be an international issue.

Bob Flibble
NSO Mafia Don

Give the man a break. He's wearing a penguin costume, for heaven's sake.

Still OOC: Not so, actually, because all of my posts in this thread so far have been intended to be (as the original ones were labelled) OOC*... and, here in RL, nobody requires me myself to wear (and I don't choose to wear, either) any such outfit... :)

(Yes, I do realise that I omitted to mark my of the later posts thus... but I didn't append Alfred's personal signature to any of those, either...)

I don't understand.
How is this a matter for the United Nations?

It’s primarily for the idea of reducing factors that might trigger international conflict, as in the RL ‘World Cup War’ that I mentioned earlier… For other examples from RL, I don’t know whether Maradona’s “Hand of God” goal could have been the last straw if it had occurred at a point when tension between Britain and Argentina was a lot higher, but consider that India and Pakistan have both a longstanding territorial dispute — which has involved at least three outbreaks of open warfare so far — and fairly regular Cricket matches against each other… and that both of those nations are now nuclear powers… so that the potential escalation from bad sportsmanship in that case could be very serious indeed…

Uh... what?
Are we even seriously discussing this?

Discussing, yes: “seriously”, I’m not so sure about…

You know, I oughta revoke your NSO membership for even considering this to be an international issue.

Bob Flibble
NSO Mafia Don

1) I’m speaking OOC, remember… and isn’t the NSO membership supposedly held by a specific nation rather than by the player, so that if I were to submit this using a puppet that has no IC connection to ‘St Edmund’ then there’d be no IC reason for you to take action against the latter country?
2) It’s the ‘hopefully reduce behaviour that could potentially trigger international wars’ factor, which I’ve already mentioned, that I think makes it at least potentially an “international” issue…
3) “Strength: Mild”, with only one operational clause and that no stronger than “STRONGLY URGES”… and you would (at least when speaking IC) consider that grounds for possible expulsion?!?

Yeah, I think Flib was joking.

2) It’s the ‘hopefully reduce behaviour that could potentially trigger international wars’ factor, which I’ve already mentioned, that I think makes it at least potentially an “international” issue…
If a nation's going to go to war over bad sportsmanship, they're going to go to war anyway they're just looking for an excuse.

But the more inclined they themselves are towards good sportsmanship, and the generally "polite" behaviour that should hopefully accompany it too, the less likely they might be to look for other excuses for going to war instead of agreeing to negotiate...

*Sigh* I think that Pierre de Coubertin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_de_Coubertin) would have understood...

Sunbmitted, just to see how well it might do without a TG campaign...