NationStates Jolt Archive

I re-posted a proposal... one that had some 30 endorsements (i think) last time before the servers went down precluding any further votes from being added. I received this telegram today:
"Your proposal "Reclaiming State Sovereignty" has been removed from the voting queue at the UN as it demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the UN system here in NationStates. Do not re-post it. This is your first warning."

I do not undertand what you mean. I understand completely how it works, and while i think the UN has some good characteristics, I think it needs some tweaking, hence the proposal. If the people do not want it, then they shall not vote for it... plain and simple. My proposal was to further the interests of state sovereignty and limit the UN in its overreaching power to change duly enacted national legislation within a state. If the unanimous consent provisions were the proble, then i can remove them... however, it is not uncommon for international organizations to require such concent before impeding on the sovereignty of any of its members.

Is it not my right as a member who disagrees with some of the previous proposals, but who will follow them as long as they are "law" (though they are not my laws), to try and change them? If not, please explain what the "true" purpose of the UN is. Just because you do not like it does not mean it is against the rules. Unless I hear a reasonable explanation to the contrary, or am pointed to where it is spelled out in black and white on the site (and not simply in a reply to this post by some over-zealous mod trying to decree rules on the fly), I will assume that any non left-wing proposal will be immediately banned for the sole reason that the mods do not like it. If this is so, then what is the point of the UN? To pass only those resolutions that the mods like? You even let a proposal to arm bears go through the full process... but apparently an idea like reclaiming state sovereignty is so subversive and farcical that it must be expunged. My proposal uses no hate-speech, does not make a rule persecuting any minority group, and is not written in an obscene manner.

And I quote from your very FAQ: "UN resolutions are a way to bring all member nations into line on a particular issue; be that environmental, democratic, free trade, or whatever."

I am simply trying to unite like-minded nations who want to see the UN play a part similar to that in real life and who also want to reclaim their state's sovereignty from the clutvhes of UN control. Furthermore, my proposal does not violate the only UN proposal rule that is listed, namely, suggesting a game imporvement (i.e. adding war).

I eagerly await your response to what i see as a violation of my state's rights as a UN member. I do hope you will NOT take the easy way out by expeling me from the UN or deleting my nation outright. But given the seemingly arbitrary (and summary) decision on my proposal, I would not be all that surprised.

I'm not the mod who routinely cleans the proposal list, however, given what you describe, it sounds as though your proposal was for changes to the game mechanics (limiting the effect of UN proposals on a country/changing voting stuff, etc would require changes be made to the game's code, which the FAQ states is not what the UN is for.)

My guess is that is why it was removed, not because of any supposed mod-bias.

~Evil Empress Rep Prod the Game mod

so if i were to remove the unanimous consent provisoins, then the proposal should be allowed?

In case anyone was wondering, this is the text of the resolution:
WHEREAS the UN has no business dictating morality or meddling in religious, political, economic, or personal freedoms; rather, its place is as an institution for mutual defense, peacekeeping, humanitarian relief issues, and condemning/praising a nation’s actions.

WHEREAS the UN has passed numerous resolutions that stand in violation of national sovereignty

BE IT DECLARED that the UN is not the final arbiter of right and wrong, nor of what laws a nation may enact. The UN is a place for nations to meet and resolve differences without war; a place to promote human dignity and moral responsibility, but not to force it upon member nations.

BE IT RESOLVED that all previous resolutions passed by the UN, with the following exceptions, are hereby declared null and void:
1.) Expedition of Resolution Votes
2.) UN taxation ban
3.) Search Function
4.) The IRCO

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the UN shall not pass any further resolution impeding on state sovereignty, nor repealing this resolution, unless such proposal is unanimously ratified by all member states choosing to vote.

HENCEFORTH all proposals attempting to dictate the rights of a sovereign state's citizens, morality, political freedoms, national policy, or any issue infringing on state sovereignty that are not passed by unanimous majority are to be treated as UN declarations and shall not be legally binding on any member nation.

Respectfully Submitted

I don't think that'll cut it.
Resolutions to cancel another resolution are iffy, at best. Let alone one that cancels wholesale.
The NS UN is much more invasive, the game even makes a quip to that effect when you resign.
The above two points, and the unanimous requirement make this resolution almost entirely game editing:
[list=a:f2253ee964] Changing the scope of the UN
Repealing multiple old resolutions
Restricting further proposals
Requiring unanimous vote
Creation of 'UN Declarations'.[/list:o:f2253ee964]

I think this proposal is pretty much DOA.

Sprry, i should've been more specific. I was including the ending declaration as a unanimous consent clause. In this case, it comes down to one question: Can previous UN resolutions be repealed? I see nothing in the rules that says resolutions passed are set in stone and not subject to any further changes/repealing.

I'm not trying to be difficult, but i just want to know if there is any point in my being a UN nation. If i cannot change anything, then it seems quite pointless in my case.

Can previous UN resolutions be repealed?

Yes / no / sorta. It's one of the other game flaws I've been complaining about a while now, and one that IMHO renders the UN an excercise in futility, if it weren't for access to Region Controls that has been thrown in for UN Delegates even though it has nothing to do with the UN.

It is possible to write a resolution, for which the text reads "repeal resolution X", and the stated effect is a close approximation of the opposite effect of resolution X. Since you cannot combine effect, repealing multiple resolutions at the same time cannto be done, nor can you pass a new resolution in the same resolution which also repeals another. (I know this is in total contradiction to what happened with "'RBH' Replacement", but that's not the only passed resolution which is inherently flawed)

Since resolutions are only applied when they pass, and no retro-active application is done, the above 'repeal mechanism' will attempt to repeal the resolution for nations that weren't subjected to the original one (and modify their stats in doing so) and fail to repeal it for those that were subjected to it but no longer are in the UN. Note that resigning from the UN doesn't 'free' a nation from past resolutions, it merely means you're not affected by future ones. Also, joining doesn't mean the previous resolutions are applied to your nation either.

I've basically decided that the UN, as implemented right now, is something that might as well be ignored. I'm a UN Member since the delegacy position I have tends to provide a certain amount of 'status' towards members of other regions, which is helpful in inter-regional diplomacy, which together with my region members, are the only elements left that make this game worth playing. The UN certainly isn't one of them.

Ballotonia

I was the Mod in question (sorry for possibly being a bit sharp in the wording of the telegram itself - I'd just cleaned an awful lot of utter stupidity and filth from the queue), so I'll explain my reasoning.

WHEREAS the UN has no business dictating morality or meddling in religious, political, economic, or personal freedoms; rather, its place is as an institution for mutual defense, peacekeeping, humanitarian relief issues, and condemning/praising a nation’s actions.

Surprisingly, this is one of the first red flags which goes up in my mind. Obviously real-life-based resolutions/proposals have nothing to do with the UN, and ones which attempt to hold the NS UN to what the real one can and can't do always get a second look from me. It's a bit of a moot point as to whether a resolution which tries to restrict the UN from, say, "furthering democracy" in member nations (something it clearly can do) is actually a proposal for a change in game mechanics, but we'll leave that particular issue alone.

WHEREAS the UN has passed numerous resolutions that stand in violation of national sovereignty

BE IT DECLARED that the UN is not the final arbiter of right and wrong, nor of what laws a nation may enact. The UN is a place for nations to meet and resolve differences without war; a place to promote human dignity and moral responsibility, but not to force it upon member nations.

See my earlier "moot point" digression.


BE IT RESOLVED that all previous resolutions passed by the UN, with the following exceptions, are hereby declared null and void:
1.) Expedition of Resolution Votes
2.) UN taxation ban
3.) Search Function
4.) The IRCO

My policy is to delete most resolutions asking for things to be repealed, since that's clearly a game mechanics proposal. Obviously the actual request of "can you please repeal [proposition]?" isn't, but the underlying request of "can we please be able to repeal anything?" is.
Given further that numbers 1 and 3 were Game Mechanics proposals, number 2 is at best iffy (going purely on its title in relation to the way the game works) and 4...well, I don't recall what 4 was all about but most resolutions to set up a UN-related body are questionable at best, the proposal has a big problem in that it's clearly pro-other game mechanics proposals.


BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the UN shall not pass any further resolution impeding on state sovereignty, nor repealing this resolution, unless such proposal is unanimously ratified by all member states choosing to vote.

HENCEFORTH all proposals attempting to dictate the rights of a sovereign state's citizens, morality, political freedoms, national policy, or any issue infringing on state sovereignty that are not passed by unanimous majority are to be treated as UN declarations and shall not be legally binding on any member nation.

Yes, you're quite right that this part contributed to the removal of the proposal. Very much a game mechanics proposal now. I can appreciate the logic behind it, but under the constraints of the game it's not likely to work out.

So there you have it. Sorry for the long post, but I thought everyone deserved a bit of a window into the thought processes involved.

Given further that numbers 1 and 3 were Game Mechanics proposals, number 2 is at best iffy (going purely on its title in relation to the way the game works) and 4...well, I don't recall what 4 was all about but most resolutions to set up a UN-related body are questionable at best, the proposal has a big problem in that it's clearly pro-other game mechanics proposals.

Am I correct in understanding that part of your reasoning here is that the proposal was deleted because it fails to claim a repeal on previously passed resolutions which are currently considered improper?!?!? If so, could you please elaborate on that argument, because I don't understand why it would apply at all.

Suggestion: How about some Mod (or [violet] ?) going through the passed resolutions list and simply removing the ones that are deemed improper by today's standards? If deleting them is too much, they can still be placed on a Reference Document page or something.

Ballotonia

That, unfortunately, cant be done. A resolution passed is somewhat of a one time deal, or as far as I understand it is. At the time it's passed, every UN Member nation's stats are changed to reflect the resolution. The resolution's wording is saved for posterity, but other than that, the effects are over, and to recall them virtually impossible.

Well...you COULD post a proposal to the contrary, now that there's the categories of "Morality" and "Political Stability," which, so far as I understand it, influence things in the opposite direction. I mean, does that make sense? The US still has the 18th Amendment listed, even though it was repealed by the 21st. o.o

Aye, but the game mechanics work differently.

Using a resolution to repeal a resolution passed when I was a UN member will not repeal the resolution in my Nation, and will "repeal" the resolution in all the member nations - regardless of whether they were in the UN at the time the original resolution was passed. So, it becomes an issue of game mechanics. When a resolution is passed, it's a one shot deal. It hits every member nation at the time it's passed, and then it's effect is over. Members joining after the resolution is passed are unaffected except in RP, and Members resigning after are still affected.

Endonia-
Thank you for the explanation. I may not agree with it all, but at least i can understand your reasoning. One final question... As the mod who cleans out the proposal list, once and for all, do you consider any resolution repealing previous resolutions a game mechanics proposal that will therefore be deleted? Or, are we still free to make proposals trying to repeal previous resolutions provided they do not have declarations about changing the role of the UN and/or obvious game mechanics changes (i.e. the unanimous consent clause)?

thanks again for the response.

Aye, but the game mechanics work differently.

Using a resolution to repeal a resolution passed when I was a UN member will not repeal the resolution in my Nation, and will "repeal" the resolution in all the member nations - regardless of whether they were in the UN at the time the original resolution was passed. So, it becomes an issue of game mechanics. When a resolution is passed, it's a one shot deal. It hits every member nation at the time it's passed, and then it's effect is over. Members joining after the resolution is passed are unaffected except in RP, and Members resigning after are still affected.

;) Yeah, it's all a game mechanics issue...for the reason I stated above...