NationStates Jolt Archive

Please forgive me if the answer to my question is obvious

I just wanted to know if it's OK for a proposition to mention the name of a non UN member and to states, in its text, to be submitted on behalf of a non UN member.

As the one following one, for which the mentioned nation: Gruenberg, is not a UN member
http://nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=divorce

Thanks

Why would it be illegal? One name can be mentioned, and it doesn't say anywhere this has to be a UN member.

Stop being silly.

I don't understand why it would be and surely it would have been polite to tell Gruen that you were enquiring about it?

I don't understand why it would be and surely it would have been polite to tell Gruen that you were enquiring about it?


It is just a question, and i posted it in the UN forum before.

I think you fear Gruenberg is in your way on the path to fluffy world domination. I can't find another reason why you're acting this way.

Reading the rules so far as i can see the only restrictions on a Proposal Proposer is that he/she be a UN Member with at least two endorsements.
If it is illegal to propose a Proposal on behalf of a non UN Member then that opens a Big Huge can of worms regarding Co- Authors etc.
I find it strange that the Member for L&E would seek to try and have a just repeal killed in this manner rather than on the merits of the Proposal or the lack of them in the case of the repeal.

Just isnt Cricket old Boy.

VL.

:|

Reading the rules so far as i can see the only restrictions on a Proposal Proposer is that he/she be a UN Member with at least two endorsements.
If it is illegal to propose a Proposal on behalf of a non UN Member then that opens a Big Huge can of worms regarding Co- Authors etc.
I find it strange that the Member for L&E would seek to try and have a just repeal killed in this manner rather than on the merits of the Proposal or the lack of them in the case of the repeal.

Just isnt Cricket old Boy.

VL.


It just seems me strange, it's why i asked, if its ok, no pb, i just want to check, i hope my move is not unpolite, sorry if it is

Just because: I (obviously) don't consider it illegal. If it is so, I would ask that the warning be conferred upon me, rather than Fonzoland.

I think it's a legitimate question, regardless of whatever motivation we might be inclined to ascribe to the one who posed it.

Actually, I'm going to just flat-out suggest that the cited proposal is illegal. Apologies in advance to Gruenberg for any inconvenience this may cause.

Branding

Limited branding is allowed. "Limited" means that you may list one co-author by nation name only. Example:

"Co-authored by The Most Glorious Hack"

Further branding will result in the Proposal being deleted. Don't list everyone who posted in the thread for your draft, don't list yourself, don't list your Minister Of Making Proposals, and don't post the 'pre-title' of the co-author (ie: "The Republic Of...").

As you can see, the only form of branding allowed is the listing of one co-author by nation name only.

Submitted on behalf of Gruenberg.

That isn't listing a co-author, as far as I can tell.

Why don't you all just consider Fonzoland and Gruen co-authors then? Sheesh, I don't see the big deal.

Actually, I'm going to just flat-out suggest that the cited proposal is illegal. Apologies in advance to Gruenberg for any inconvenience this may cause.



As you can see, the only form of branding allowed is the listing of one co-author by nation name only.



That isn't listing a co-author, as far as I can tell.
I think you will find that is an example of the required simplicity of minimal branding which is requested. In the UNCOESB i did not have a co Author as Such yet i have thanked the nation that helped my cause most. That was Minimal Branding.

I think you will find that is an example of the required simplicity of minimal branding which is requested. In the UNCOESB i did not have a co Author as Such yet i have thanked the nation that helped my cause most. That was Minimal Branding.

Aye, there's the rub. Interpreting the rules strictly results in it being illegal, but recent precedent suggests that it's legal. That's why I think it's a legitimate question.

Some admittedly circumstantial evidence: a while back, a proposal called "Freedom of Transport", submitted by Omigodtheykilledkenny, went through four days. It didn't reach quorum, but it wasn't deleted. It had "submitted on behalf of Gruenberg" in it. Now, I know that's not enough, as they might not have 'spotted it'. But I did assume, partly from that, such would be ok. Furthermore, I'm not too sure whether UN membership matters, because I resigned before "Repeal 'UCPL'" went up to vote, and was not a UN member for the entire vote duration. As such, that one was submitted by a non-member. (And, for the record, I do intend on rejoining momentarily; just having my puppetwank fun.)

Our concern is that, LAE is a member of the UN, therefore we accept legislation from our own nation and from the UN, written by UN members

We think our demand to not accept legislation on behalf of another nation, who is not a UN member, is understandable.

Why? Lots of users have UN Puppets anyway; if that's acceptable, I don't see why this isn't.

Our concern is that, LAE is a member of the UN, therefore we accept legislation from our own nation and from the UN, written by UN members

We think our demand to not accept legislation on behalf of another nation, who is not a UN member, is understandable.

I understand your concern, but I don't really see that there's any effective way to enforce that.

Some admittedly circumstantial evidence: a while back, a proposal called "Freedom of Transport", submitted by Omigodtheykilledkenny, went through four days. It didn't reach quorum, but it wasn't deleted. It had "submitted on behalf of Gruenberg" in it. Now, I know that's not enough, as they might not have 'spotted it'. But I did assume, partly from that, such would be ok. Furthermore, I'm not too sure whether UN membership matters, because I resigned before "Repeal 'UCPL'" went up to vote, and was not a UN member for the entire vote duration. As such, that one was submitted by a non-member. (And, for the record, I do intend on rejoining momentarily; just having my puppetwank fun.)
Whatever the case for interpreting the "Branding" Issue and the "proposed on behalf of" point, Proposing when you are not a UN member and without the specified 2 endorsements is Illegal. That much i deffinately do know. Besides, I thought that was impossible unless you were a UN member to submit a proposal? Is the game not coded to NOT give you that Option?

Our concern is that, LAE is a member of the UN, therefore we accept legislation from our own nation and from the UN, written by UN members

We think our demand to not accept legislation on behalf of another nation, who is not a UN member, is understandable.
Now that is silly to me. There is nothing stopping a non UN member from becoming a UN Member getting the 2 endorsements required and writing a proposal or repeal. Having it submitted and passed and then leaving the UN.

Same result... Different route.
Next you would be after the Resolutions of the ceased Nation Resolution authors on the grounds that they are also not UN Members.

As the Major in Monty Python once said.......
" Now stop that! Stop that Right now! thats Just Silly"

VL.

LAE will be pleased, if the nation of Gruenberg accept our invitation to join once more the UN, as it seem this nation is interested in the legislation of this body.

Then, obvioulsy, we will not have anymore concern on this matter.

How does it violate the branding rule? It mentions "Gruenberg", no pre-title. As far as I know, the rules have never stipulated that proposals cannot be co-authored by non-members or submitted on behalf of non-members.

We believe that this is nothing more than a blatant attempt by the representative of Love and Esterel to derail this repeal attempt on spurious grounds completely unrelated to the merits of the issue.

We find nothing in the Rules for UN Proposals which would prohibit the inclusion of the text to which he calls attention. To us, it does not violate the letter of the "Branding" rule and conforms to its intent. We trust that the repected Moderators will respond appropriately.

By direction of His Royal Highness, Prince Leonhard II:

Patrick T. Olembe
Minister for Foreign Affairs

LAE will be pleased, if the nation of Gruenberg accept our invitation to join once more the UN, as it seem this nation is interested in the legislation of this body.

Then, obvioulsy, we will not have anymore concern on this matter.
Grue has a puppet in the UN. Grue is using his puppet as his UN nation.

This transparent attack is beyond petty, and I strongly urge that the powers that be do not heed it and instead issue some appropriate words towards the... individual... who brought this lowly and unjustified attack to Moderation. Surely the mods have better things to do.

~Aram Koopman, Knootian ambassador to the NSUN
"If the United Nations is a country unto itself, then the commodity it exports most is words."

http://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/NSO-member.PNGhttp://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/unog-member.PNGhttp://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/uma-member.PNGhttp://home.ripway.com/2005-12/534911/WIKI-member.PNG

Personally and with complete respect can’t see an issue here. In the end of the day Fonzoland must agree to the resolution otherwise they will not have brought it to their fellow UN members. As such we have a UN member bringing a proposal to the floor and in our humble opinion whatever agreements exist between members and non-members or indeed individual nations is surely none of our concern.

Respectfully
Lydia Cornwall, UN Ambassador
Office of UN Relations, Dept for Foreign Affairs
HM Government of Telidia

Let me just make a few points here, since I submitted the proposal:

1. I think these are very low-level strategies. If the proposal was indeed illegal, the mods would not need your whining to notice it.

2. Do not worry, in case this one is illegal, some other repeal will pass. By now you got all my guns fired up, so if it is up to me, your proposal is going down in flames.

3. The submitter is a member with two endorsements. The submitter reads the proposal and agrees with it. The submitter takes responsibility for it. All the last line does is have the courtesy to acknowledge who wrote the bloody text.

4. Last time I checked there were 90 delegates agreeing with the proposal, do you seriously think that Gruen's status matters to them? Do you think it is a conspiracy by non-members?

Let me just make a few points here, since I submitted the proposal:

1. I think these are very low-level strategies. If the proposal was indeed illegal, the mods would not need your whining to notice it.

2. Do not worry, in case this one is illegal, some other repeal will pass. By now you got all my guns fired up, so if it is up to me, your proposal is going down in flames.

3. The submitter is a member with two endorsements. The submitter reads the proposal and agrees with it. The submitter takes responsibility for it. All the last line does is have the courtesy to acknowledge who wrote the bloody text.

4. Last time I checked there were 90 delegates agreeing with the proposal, do you seriously think that Gruen's status matters to them? Do you think it is a conspiracy by non-members?

I have invited Gruenberg, the nation for this proposition is on behalf to join the UN, as I'm defending the "UN sovereignty" on UN's own legislation.

I have invited Gruenberg, the nation for this proposition is on behalf to join the UN, as I'm defending the "UN sovereignty" on UN's own legislation.

Sorry, but:

1. I can hardly understand your english or your point.
2. I cannot understand at all which of my comments you are replying to.
3. I don't think anyone reading this will understand how your "invitation" will be relevant for Gruenberg, or make any difference for the mods' ruling on the matter.

Sorry, but:

1. I can hardly understand your english or your point.



I was just suggesting that if Gruenberg apply to join the UN now, he will be a UN member very soon, won't it better?

Ok - here's my qualms with this:

I don't know the legality of the matter and await the moderator's decision on the matter, but I think there are few who would contend that Gruenberg is one of the leading members of the UN - even without his official position within its halls. He could just as easily be doing what I'm doing and have a UN puppet while operating from his main account, but he had no reason to.

Regardless, this is the most ludicrous political move out there. There are dozens of repeals being drafted for 135 and this one correctly and fairly finds a number of failings of UNR 135. It made attempts to consult both authors of the resolution - and they took advice I gave them (though disagreed with LAE's request that a replacement be drafted first). It was submitted by one of the top two co-authors for it, and only recognized the person who had pretty much written and built the repeal.

At best, you're asking for a well done repeal to be removed and delayed a week, and Gruenbergs rightful place of being recognized as author to be demoted to coauthor because of ludicrous politics. I'm sorry, that's cutting hairs.

I don't know the legality of the matter and await the moderator's decision on the matter

Thanks - same for me

31 posts.

31 posts on an utter non-issue. Are the other sub-forums really running this slowly? This is perfectly acceptable. The branding rules were added to stop the growing trend of people listing fifteen to twenty different people along with their pets on Proposals. When half the Proposal is co-authors, titles, appelations, and so on, there's a problem. My example was just that: an example.

As for L&E's revulsion at having a non-UN member creating legislation, there's plenty of real world precident for just such a thing. Numerous laws have been passed that were though up by normal citizens and championed by a representative. Just because I didn't elect the citizen doesn't mean I can have the law struck out, the people I did elect voted on the issue. Also, think about Friend of the Court briefs. These are filed by people who aren't involved in the case but want to try and sway the procedings. All of these are acceptable practices as is this Proposal.

If this was an honest question, no harm, no foul. If this was an underhanded attempt at nit-picking to death a Proposal, very, very bad form. I would be sorely disappointed.

31 posts.

31 posts on an utter non-issue. Are the other sub-forums really running this slowly? This is perfectly acceptable. The branding rules were added to stop the growing trend of people listing fifteen to twenty different people along with their pets on Proposals. When half the Proposal is co-authors, titles, appelations, and so on, there's a problem. My example was just that: an example.

As for L&E's revulsion at having a non-UN member creating legislation, there's plenty of real world precident for just such a thing. Numerous laws have been passed that were though up by normal citizens and championed by a representative. Just because I didn't elect the citizen doesn't mean I can have the law struck out, the people I did elect voted on the issue. Also, think about Friend of the Court briefs. These are filed by people who aren't involved in the case but want to try and sway the procedings. All of these are acceptable practices as is this Proposal.

If this was an honest question, no harm, no foul. If this was an underhanded attempt at nit-picking to death a Proposal, very, very bad form. I would be sorely disappointed.

It's legal, so thanks for your answer and sorry to have pertubed this quiet forum. I just hope you will forgive me that it could have seemed strange for me that a co-author could be a non-UN nation.

Our concern is that, LAE is a member of the UN, therefore we accept legislation from our own nation and from the UN, written by UN members

We think our demand to not accept legislation on behalf of another nation, who is not a UN member, is understandable.

There have been at least two resolutions that came to the floor *after* the nations that submitted them were no longer in the UN:

Hu Bai's (sp?) -- the resolution was a Moral Decency about Epidemics
Gruenberg

There may have been others. Hu Bai was ejected from the UN, Gruenberg chose to leave IIRC.