NationStates Jolt Archive

So, time to remove another useless law.

If any of us examine the original metric system resolution (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7029635&postcount=25), we see it proposing a few things, but requiring nothing. I think that there truly needs to be a standardization of international weights and measures, but this blocks any such resolution from being made.

So, lets get rid of it and pass a new one (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13377816&postcount=23).



Understanding that "Metric System" seeks to standardize weights and measurements, specifically, converting all nations to the metric system,

Regretting, however, that the resolution fails to require any standardized weights and measurements, or provide any details for their implementation, defeating its central purpose,

Seeking the opportunity to pass more detailed and comprehensive international weights and measurements standardization,

Noting that this ineffective piece of legislation bars such an act from passage,

The United Nations hereby repeals "Metric System".

If anyone has any comments before I submit it, now is obviously the time.

OOC: No objections.

On the last occasion when a proposal for this purpose reached quorum, suitable replacements were drafted by both Cobdenia and myself. If this version not only reaches quorum but gets passed then anybody wishing to pass a replacement might find looking at those drafting threads -- instead of just starting from scratch -- helpful...

It's probably a good idea to take my name off the proposal.

Some more wording suggestions:

Understanding that "Metric System" seeks to standardize [...] weights and measurements, specifically, converting all nations to the metric system,

Regretting, however, that the resolution fails to require any standardized weights and measurements, or provide any details for their implementation, defeating its central purpose,

Seeking the opportunity to pass more detailed and comprehensive [...] international weights and measurements standardization,

Noting that this ineffective piece of legislation bars such an act from passage,

The United Nations hereby repeals "Metric System".The [...] is where I've omitted text; if you wish to take these suggestions, please note what has been removed.

Hmm, maybe we should use the British spelling for "standardise," so people don't think it's Americans proposing this. :p

Or write the whole thing in German. :D

Oh the painful memories of Repeal:ROMAW.

Add something about helping communication between nations. That helps sell it to those who want world peace. And to those who don't want unity, we just tell them that it's just a change in the measurement system.

So what would "Requiring" entail exactly? Forbidding people to speak of their old measures? Sounds like a contradiction of various free speech resolutions and/or constitutions.

Here's what I propose to be the way the metric system to be used.

Nations must alter their education to include only the metric system. Government reports will use the metric system when providing any measurement. If companies in are required to provide information on their product that involves measurements (such as fat content in food), then the nation that the company is based in must provide the measurements using the metric system.

Anyone care to add to this?

This is at least better than several of the positively shameful attempted repeals authored last year, but we remain unconvinced. In particular, it employs the standard repealer's fallacy in the last point; insisting that the resolution is both ineffective and blocks more effectively legislation is at best dubious logic.

Particularly since the language of the repeal implies that the author has plans for a replacement, we would like to know that those are not just empty words before proceeding.

So, lets get rid of it and pass a new one (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13377816&postcount=23).

When this repeal passes, Cob has said he'll submit that and I'll make sure it goes through.

Oh, and Gob, it's not exactly poor logic to say that the current resolution blocks anything new from being enacted, at least with reference to this. I could not pass a standardization of weights and measures right now because of "Metric System". I for one applaud this body's ruling that redundant or contradictory resolutions are not allowed.

Edit: Oh, and Kenny unless you ask me not to specifically I'm leaving your name on it, you've been a huge help. If you really don't want co-author credit, let me know.

This is up for a test run. The sucky part about trying to push this through is how many other metric repeal proposals there are. At first chance I'll do my best to send this through.

Scotchpinestan supports the repeal; we will not support a replacement.

Who's to say one system is better than the other? The Agregorn measuring system is easily converted to international standards, and if we are to recognize international standards to be compared against, we should have the right to use whatever means of measuring in our borders, assuming they align consistently and logically with international standards. Any well educated society should be able to manage this, and it is in the interest of efficiency to our nation to keep our own format. Personally, I feel a base 12 system would do better, as very few common and natural elements behave in a base 10 system.

Scotchpinestan supports the repeal; we will not support a replacement.
Solensina Tadefta, head of the Safalran UN Delegation, writes:

We are inclined to agree. The benefits of the metric system are easily apparent, and each individual nation converting to the metric system benefits regardless of the behaviour of its neighbours. We therefore see no need for legislation on the issue.

This is up for a test run. The sucky part about trying to push this through is how many other metric repeal proposals there are. At first chance I'll do my best to send this through.Yeah, Gruen and I were stuck reporting a bunch of illegal Gay Rights repeals when we were trying to get my version through. Nowadays mods only delete the blatantly illegal, but it's still worth a shot: Both repeals in the queue ahead of yours contain illegal "NatSov!!!" arguments.

And I repeat, it would be a very good idea to take my name off the proposal.

I wonder if there is a way to help this reach quorum... If anyone needs help, I could start advertising. Although I would appreciate it if the replacement mentioned SI units somewhere.

The People's Republic of Foward Unto Dawn

Oh, and Gob, it's not exactly poor logic to say that the current resolution blocks anything new from being enacted, at least with reference to this.
That's not poor logic, no. Claiming that the resolution does nothing and blocks anything new is a lot more dubious, and sounds too much like hysterical rhetoric to make us happy about supporting it.

"In a rare case, we agree with Gobbannium on this. The repeal states that the resolution proposes that the Metric System is adopted, and gives no way to implmenet it. You can intergrate this concern in the Preamble of the new Replacement, stating that you are therefore fufilling the purpose of the Metric System Resolution (and then repeal MS as useless), but that could therefore be seen as an illegal amendment. It really does not matter what we think however, it matters what the gnomes say, and it is far better not to make them angry if we violate decorum.

We however also disagree with Douria, altough we do note that our disagreements is in the minority. We believe the resolution in fact does something (in the past, 'propose' really meant 'mandates'), in that it forces us to all comply with the Metric System. While this may not be true, the fact remains that new nations may also assume the same as I do, leading to nations adopting TWO different systems of measurements, metric and non-metric, disrupting trade alltogether thanks to confusion.

Therefore, in order to replace it with the much more saner Replacement which regulates international trade, we have no choice but to get rid of the Metric System."
---Dr. Bob, UN Ambassador of SilentScope003

Who's to say one system is better than the other? The Agregorn measuring system is easily converted to international standards, and if we are to recognize international standards to be compared against, we should have the right to use whatever means of measuring in our borders, assuming they align consistently and logically with international standards. Any well educated society should be able to manage this, and it is in the interest of efficiency to our nation to keep our own format. Personally, I feel a base 12 system would do better, as very few common and natural elements behave in a base 10 system.

OOC: The system used in St Edmund, which was "inherited" from its former colonial masters in Godwinnia (http://www.nationstates.net/godwinnia) is also a 'base 12' one. There's an (incomplete) article about it, under the title of Godwinnian Weights and Measures (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/godwinnian_weights_and_measures.html), in NSwiki...

This is back up for a second run through,

http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=metric

If ya can approve it, go for it.

Here in Bahgum, except for our ambassadorial staff who claims he was drinking at the time, our international traders and our Glorious Leader no-one has heard of this so called 'Me Trick' system. Our large general populous prefer to stick to our sovereign weights and measures, namely:

The Imperial Pint for all measures of liquid - 1 pint = the scientifically deduced volume required to convince you to drink another.

Distance is measured in kegs - 1 keg = the height of a Bahgumian beer barrel, 260 beer barrels to the Bahgumian party (the longer measure of distance).

Weights are simple - small weights are measured in mother in laws warts equivalents
medium weights in using the standard ferret = 120 warts
large weights in carthorses = 500 ferrets

Hail the metric system: the only option!

Hail the metric system: the only option!

A hail of bullets perhaps...or rotten tomatoes ( a few hundredweight of? )

After some consideration we are against this repeal. The repeal of the "metric" system could result in UN nations adopting inches and we all know if you give them an inch they will take a yard, and then perhaps a furlong. I don't want to have to figure out how many furlongs per fortnight I'm traveling down the road.

Ah, the Ex Pirate King has informed me that it 1 km/hour = 1640¼ furlongs/fortnight.

This begs the question that the not so hidden purpose of the repeal is to introduce "more detailed and comprehensive international weights and measurements standardization." Thus we remain opposed.

I don't want to have to figure out how many furlongs per fortnight I'm traveling down the road.

You won't have to under the replacement, if it's international trade, you'll be using a standardized system. If it's here at the UN it'd be a standardized system. The only thing is that under it, locally, people can use their own system of measurements if they are more applicable.(I have twelve fingers! Why base ten? or We use our monetary units as a measurement, why should we have to convert to this newfangled system?).

We need to thread the line between promoting a better system and giving people the right to choose, but it's alright in the end. The current resolution doesn't require anything of me anyhow. ;)

How many grams is 1 ounce? 24 grams?

We do not see why the current legislation would not allow to pass another resolution to standarise weight measures.

We are therefore not convinced that a repeal would not lead us to a diversification of measures generally spoken.

That would result in loosing a piece of UN-legislation that - for once - simplifies the world...

We will vote against the repeal if this proposition should come to vote.

We're pleased to see more opposition to the metric system as a whole. If it means to replace the current system (which requires us to alter nothing... save to have the means in which to convert to our own system from an international standard), we're viciously opposed.

As to the comments on why base 12, think for a moment on factoring. 10 is divisible by 2 and 5. Realistically, how often do things get portioned into 5ths? Not to mention that the number 10 occurs in few places in nature (5 does occur often, and so does 2, but so do 3, 8, and 13). 12 offers divisibility with 2,3,4, and 6. Portioning becomes much simpler (seriously, cut a pie into 5ths sometime and tell me how that goes). Accommodating a larger multitude of smaller primes makes life easier for those that must implement. The logical wrap-around is simply a matter of perspective and language (and you can thank the Arabs for that).

Agregorn isn't proposing that we adopt a dodecimal system (it would be a lot of work for the nations around the world to adopt this mathematical Esperanto). We are simply stating our dislike for the paternalistic enforcement of what we perceive to be a dumb system of measurement that is no less costlier to implement in our borders than any other alternative.

That would result in loosing a piece of UN-legislation that - for once - simplifies the world...Yes, it simplifies the world. It's so "simple," in fact, that it manages not to do a single thing! And you'd vote to keep it!

We applaud your sense of "simplicity," but wish it were more consistent. Retaining wasteful legislation doesn't really "simplify" matters much, does it?

Wello, this is back up and TG'd for. Lets see how it does.

So, time to remove another useless law.

If any of us examine the original metric system resolution (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7029635&postcount=25), we see it proposing a few things, but requiring nothing. I think that there truly needs to be a standardization of international weights and measures, but this blocks any such resolution from being made.

So, lets get rid of it and pass a new one (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13377816&postcount=23).





If anyone has any comments before I submit it, now is obviously the time.

My Government fully supports the repeal suggested.We believe it gives constructiveness and productivity.
Regards
Sir Jack Straw
UN Ambassodor for the TheElitists and Regional Delegate
Conservative Republicans

Wello, this is back up and TG'd for. Lets see how it does.

Our region and its nations are against this metric system.Have it repealed.

Sir Jack Straw
UN Ambassodor
ConservativeRepublicans

"Even though the Free Land of Setswana and most of the nations in the Miniconomy region use the metric system, we are very content with the 'strongly encouraging' nature of the original resolution."

The Setswana ambassador, absent-mindedly, sweeps with his sleeve over his desk, thereby dropping a ruler on the floor. He reaches for it while continuing talking: "When this resolution is repealed, a more binding system will be introduced, whereas right now no nation is obligated to use this metric system. Self-regulation works fine: when one is the only in a region using the old inch/gallon/pound system, one quickly isolates oneself."

[OOC: No, really. It's not like England is considered a real part of Europe :p]

I have heretofore supported the Metric System resolution through many repeal attempts. However, I believe now is the time for a repeal, given the effort to implement weights and measures standards in the "replacement" resolution. I use quotes there because Metric isn't exactly being replaced so much as a blanket attempt to standardize all measures for the whole of the UN across the whole range of measurable...er...things.

I approve the proposal and hope it reaches quorum.

This is now in queue, but it'll be a week or more before it comes up for vote. At least the UN is active huh?

Congratulations!

There is now a poll.

The delegate of Aoi Kiru Usagi Minzoku believes that the delegate submitting this proposal is, in the most polite way possible, a fool. The reason the metric system is so excellent is because conversions between units is laughably easy. To divide or multiply you just need to add or remove zeros or decimal points. Moreover, unlike archaic English units or American units, all units of the metric system follow this same rule of decimal points. It's easy; why complicate it further.

Aoi Kiru Usagi Minzoku is completely against this foolhardy proposal.

We're not debating the merits of the Metric System my friend.

You see, the original resolution itself is inherently flawed, it merely has a label going for it.

My rationale for repealing it is based more on seeking the opportunity to pass comprehensive international standardization of weights and measures.

You see, due to poor wording, "Metric System" fails to define any measurements, and at the same time it has such weak wording as to be completely ignorable by any nation that wishes to do so.

I have a personal opinion with regards to international laws, diplomacy, and trade. We should indeed have a standardized system of measurements for international use. Note the inclusion of the word "international" in the statement. Each nation should, within it's own borders of course, be able to use whichever measurement system they find most useful. If it is the international version, that'll be great. If it's a internal standard, it'll still require conversion to the international standard when used in an international setting. This is a middle ground between the two points of view on the issue that I hope we reasonable nations will support.

I understand that some may find it easier to use the Metric System for internal measurements, that is fine. There is a replacement for this ready that will truly standardize international weights and measures, while allowing each nation to decide it's own measurements. Can't we meet half way on this?

Link to Replacement: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13377816&postcount=23

The delegate of Aoi Kiru Usagi Minzoku believes that the delegate submitting this proposal is, in the most polite way possible, a fool. The reason the metric system is so excellent is because conversions between units is laughably easy. To divide or multiply you just need to add or remove zeros or decimal points. Moreover, unlike archaic English units or American units, all units of the metric system follow this same rule of decimal points. It's easy; why complicate it further.

Aoi Kiru Usagi Minzoku is completely against this foolhardy proposal.

As the leader of United North Americo, I couldn't disagree more. The metric system is lousy and a failure. We refuse to use it in our country and I am all for repealing it. Agregorn stated it even better.

Repeal the metric system and send it to the grave with other nonsense standards like "Stones".

Zbigniew "Zbiggy" Tramwajewski, Minister of Popular Culture References, leaned over the shoulder of the confused, stately man sitting at Narod Krow Liliowych's table and peered at the bizarre addendum to the proposal at hand.
(translated from the original Polish)"Mister Delegate, it asks: 'Describe what Marcellas Wallace looks like'"
The man turned, "I knew that! It still makes no sense.."
"The correct response is, 'What?'"
"What?"
"Say 'What' again! Say. 'What?'. Again! I dare ya! I double dare ya motha fucka! Say 'what' one more goddamn time!"
A stunned look occupied the face of the esteemed delegate, before it slowly morphed into a face of understanding.
"Please, Mister Minister, which American film does this reference?"
"A song, by the immortal poet Snoop Dogg, which in turn references the film, Pulp Fiction"
"I see. Next time, just tell me, instead of spouting nonsense. If I wasn't so clever, I might have not understood, and had you removed from office."
"Yes, Mister Delegate. Also, I recommend voting in favor of the repeal."
"I agree. They will never vote in another standardization, and we will be able to promote the kind of Chaos that forced the American astronauts to jerry-rig new wrenches while-"
"IN SPACE! And from duct tape, too!"
"Sometimes, I wonder why your position even exists.."
"So that moments like these can exist, Mister Delegate."
"Right..."

As the leader of United North Americo, I couldn't disagree more. The metric system is lousy and a failure. We refuse to use it in our country and I am all for repealing it. Agregorn stated it even better.

Repeal the metric system and send it to the grave with other nonsense standards like "Stones".

We, the people of IQ1000, are totally against this outrageous proposal to repeal this metric system.

1 Because the metric system is to prevent any stupid measure like your "stones" being used and thus making international trade almost impossible.

2 It is also in the interest of science in general(aka the world) that the metric system is to be kept. It is impossible for scientists to work together on international problems like global warming and other complicating issues without an internationally accepted system of metrics

So a standard metric system is for the benefit of all humanity.

Yours sincerely,

The recently elected President of the republic of IQ1000

*snip*

My friend, you miss the point entirely, we're doing this to replace a broken resolution with an international standard(while still allowing internal measurements to remain independent). This resolution supports exactly what you do.

We have cast our 11 votes as Delegate of the United Nations FOR this repeal. We wish it's author the best of luck and hope this resolution is finally erased from the books.

Vance Aceon
Deputy Presiding Jevian United Nations Representative

I admit I haven't read all of these posts, so forgive if this problem has already been discussed.

I disagree with your assertion that your new proposal is stronger. By putting "when appropriate" in the new resolution, you've inserted a loophole which essentially renders the new one just as toothless as the old resolution.

Furthermore, I think it should be toothless because mandating systems of measurement is unnecessary and intrusive. For instance, some research would be better completed using the Kelvin scale instead of Celsius. I think it is enough to formally recognize the metric system as the preferred system of measurement to be used by the UN.

(Also, it wouldn't hurt to define the metric system as that identified by the International System of Units.)

OOC: This belongs in the discussion of Cob's replacement (not authored by Douria, incidentally)

Our region and its nations are against this metric system.Have it repealed.

Sir Jack Straw
UN Ambassodor
ConservativeRepublicans

QFT (Quoted For Truth)

The entire world does not need to be in use of the metric system, use the system that works for you.

As representative for my region, I have cast my vote FOR this repeal. Although we support the concept of the metric system, the poor craftsmanship and weakness of the relevant resolution clearly outweighs this. Despite the fact it is grounded in the early history of the UN.

CoN Lord Chancellor
Delegate of The Council of Narnia

Your poll's not cool, man. And my name is spelled Marsellus.

I've read the replacement and the original, and I can't see why the resolution shouldn't be repealed. I'll agree to it.
REPEAL

Horgen Dush
UN Representative, Nomadic Peoples of Damanucus

I don't understand the need for the metric system to be standardized when it is already standardized.

You don't have to wonder, do I measure this in gallons or in teaspoons? Litres are the only way besides cubic metres, which are are different ways of expressing the same thing (1 L= 1 dm3)
You don't have to wonder, is that in US litres or in UK litres? Litres are litres, wherever you go in the world.
You don't have to wonder, how many litres are in a kilolitre? There are no confusing measurement conversions.

SI measurements and the metric system are standardized and should require no further elaboration nor clarification.

The original resolution leaves something to be desired in literacy and specificity but, is basically sound. However, the repeal primarily addresses a non-issue.

The Metric System (or System International as it is also referred to) is a standardized system of weights and measures thus, the "Regretting" argument is invalid. This makes the next statement as well, ineffective.

In essence, this repeal appears to be based on the misunderstood idea that the resolution needs to define the already defined system. Needless to say, I'm voting against the repeal.

My friend, you miss the point entirely, we're doing this to replace a broken resolution with an international standard(while still allowing internal measurements to remain independent). This resolution supports exactly what you do.

If that is true, Im going to have to vote for the proposal.

But why didn't they just REPLACE it rather than REPEAL it? It would work al lot better(it takes just one voteround to decide), plus more people (I) would better understand what they are actually voting for.

if this is already the case, just ignore my ignorance

*snip*

The problem with that is that the UN rules clearly dictate you cannot amend or replace a current resolution. There are a few still on the books that pre-date that rule, but now the only method of replacement is to first repeal.

Although we personally support the notion of repealing the resolution, we're undecided on the merits of the replacement. In any case, our vote will be determined by the region's vote, which is leaning against. In the meantime, just to note our disappointment at the exclusion of
Why do we feel it's necessary to yak about bullshit in order to feel comfortable? That's when you know you've found somebody really special -- when you can just shut the fuck up for a minute, comfortably share a silence.

The metric system is already used in a lot of countries. Probably, most countries in this world are using this syste. There is no need orf further implimentation by the UN because we are talking about standarized measurement system. We only have to give the countries non using metric system a deadline to adapt themselves to the metric system, using their own laws. This is a system used in international organization like EU. In case of non adapting in time this metric system, no sanctions will have to be taken. This is a UN decission non compulsory, just indicative, and will be taking by most of countries because of its utility.

Thank you for your attention

The original resolution leaves something to be desired in literacy and specificity but, is basically sound. However, the repeal primarily addresses a non-issue.

The Metric System (or System International as it is also referred to) is a standardized system of weights and measures thus, the "Regretting" argument is invalid. This makes the next statement as well, ineffective.

In essence, this repeal appears to be based on the misunderstood idea that the resolution needs to define the already defined system. Needless to say, I'm voting against the repeal.Yes, the misreading of that clause has become one of the most tiresome features of this entire debate. The author does not regret that the resolution Metric System fails to define metric system, but rather that it lacks the details necessary for nations to know whether they're in compliance with the law or not. When you're converting all nations to a universal standard, those details might be handy. For instance, is a nation in noncompliance if it uses the nautical mile? How about if it chooses to post the Imperial value along with the metric value under the all-too-vague "mandate" of "all official research, roadways, and labeling"?

That, and if you carefully read the original document, it's just an argument in favor of the metric system, and contains not one requirement for nations even to use it. "I propose that all countries within the United Nations be converted to the Metric standard" is not a mandate, Ambassador; just a proposition. And entirely too weak to justify the resolution's classification as "Strong."

Needless to say, the Federal Republic has voted in favor of repealing this grade-school essay masquerading as international law.

Jimmy Baca
Adviser to the Mission

I don't know the metric system well. The thing is that it would be easier if all of the Nation's was on the metric system. Another thing in common and less time converting numbers. Yes, people who don't know the metric system (including me) needs to learn it.

The metric system calls for a standard that all nations would abid by.

I suggest that we don't appeal it, but rather make it a requirement that the children of the nations be taught it with a requirement all items sold by weight or volume be required to list both it's coutry's standard and the meteric system for a period not to exceed 5 years.

That 5 years being the grace period that each nation gets to bring their population up to speed on the metric system by teaching it at all levels of the education system.

I will vote against the appeal

Yes, the misreading of that clause has become one of the most tiresome features of this entire debate. The author does not regret that the resolution Metric System fails to define metric system, but rather that it lacks the details necessary for nations to know whether they're in compliance with the law or not.

"Metric System" does require definition, because there are in fact several variations of "The Metric System." The original has evolved constantly. The version that this resolution undoubtedly intends to use has only been in place for about 50 years. In addition, that version will probably evolve further within the next 50 years.

I have cast the Region's vote in favor of the repeal and eagerly await the replacement.

Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky
Delegate, Antarctic Oasis
Chairman, Yeldan Committee For State Security

:headbang: Holy crap. We repeal more acts then we make. Why focus on something so insignificant as wether or not the metric system act specifys what the metric system is and just start using some common sense in comprehension to what these acts stand for.

The Republic of Youteria has voted AGAINST this resolution. Even though its premises are, in our opinion, correct, we believe that repeals should be done after new legislation on the subject has been passed, so to stop the existenceof possible holes in our normative system. This being said, and even after we have seen that the resolution is probably going to be passed, we cast this vote as a juridical statement of our position on the matter. May God save Youteria.

Casius Brutus Agrippa, Head of Department, Department of Juridic Investigations.

we believe that repeals should be done after new legislation on the subject has been passed,

This is impossible. A true replacement resolution would duplicate the resolution it is trying to replace, making it illegal. Repeals must come first.

Indeed. We are just stating that we believe the current system isn´t good enough. A new resolution should derogate an older one of similar content, instead of the U.N. being obliged to pass two resolutions to create the same juridic effect. This means that the nations that partake in this organization should vote new legislation as a means for repealing older ones, to prevent loopholes or misunderstandings. May God save Youteria.

Casius Brutus Agrippa, Head of Department, Department of Juridic Investigations.

Then take it to Moderation, or your own thread in this forum. This is not a topic about changing the rules, but repealing a resolution under the current ruleset.

Then take it to Moderation, or your own thread in this forum.No, actually, don't. We're not going to completely rewrite the UN code for this.

No disrespect is intended for any nation, but Mikitivity prefers the degree of standardization associated with the Metric System and will be voting against this repeal. Should this repeal pass, we will enthusiastically support a replacement that supports the Metric System and also support other resolutions which promote an international system of measurement (which we believe benefits international trade).

Nations must alter their education to include only the metric system. Anyone care to add to this?
Yes I would as to do this would mean you need to repeal existing resolutions that give individual nations rights to set their own education courses as they see fit.. As to say they can only teach metric system means the UN is dictating what they teach and I believe existing resolutions prevent that. So until it is repealed you can't dictate eduction courses.

Mainly under R171 this section: 6. Entrusts nations with the right and responsibility to decide on the structure of their public education systems and the role of private institutions, mandatory, encouraged and prohibited subjects, skills and course elements in educational institutions, and the financing of educational programs, subject to previous UN legislation still in effect;As we have to include those passed before that before R171 that remain in effect but not those after regarding eductation...

*snip*

I assume then you'll be supporting the replacement that I'm supporting with this repeal?

There is a article in the replacement that recommends the teaching of approved systems, however, 171 means it cannot be any stronger than that

For The Grand Duchy of Severac the metric system is the easiest and most self-explanatory system to use. It is a natural progression from other systems including the Imperial System, and is therefore an improvement on these existing measures. The Grand Duchy of Severac will not support the repeal of this system and will take the matter up with the European UN Delegate to push for it's continuation.

Lord Styker - Grand Duke of Severac

The Grand Duchy of Severac will not support the repeal of this system and will take the matter up with the European UN Delegate to push for it's continuation.Your delegate has already voted against the repeal, and as voting ends in half an hour, I doubt there's much more he can do to reverse the outcome.

http://home.austin.rr.com/johnnytexas/nationstates/texas.jpg
Texas Department of UN Affairs
YEEHAW!! The votes from our fellow Texans are in and the results are virtually unanimous! This resolution must be repealed. Therefore, I am pleased to announce that our Delegate, NewTexas, has cast the region's 58 votes in favor of this measure, in accordance with their wishes. We duly congratulate the author on his success today, as the repeal is certain to pass. And it's about time!No TV and No Beer
Texas Secretary of UN Affairs

I assume then you'll be supporting the replacement that I'm supporting with this repeal?

Your first post in this thread points to Cobdenia's proposal. My government will be voting in favour of that proposal should it reach the UN floor. :) If other competing proposals reach the floor and promote standardization we are very likely to support those as well.

I'd like to thank all the supporters of this repeal for making it possible, and I'd like offer a special thanks to Kenny for his help in drafting this. Lets move on to the replacement by Cobdenia now.