NationStates Jolt Archive

The UN General Assemby…

ASSERTING that fiscal responsibility is critical for maintaining the legitimacy and integrity of this body,

REAFFIRMING that donations, gifts, aid funding, etc. are legitimate means of funding for the UN, although taxation of member nations or their citizens is not,

hereby MANDATES that

1)The UN shall not have more expenditures than revenue for any fiscal year;

2) The UN shall compile comprehensive financial records on all of its transactions, and that these records shall be made available to the public;

3) The UN shall be audited by independent financial experts, who shall ascertain the fiscal health of the organization and make recommendations as needed;

4) The UN shall keep its funds only in reputable, regularly audited and financially sound institutions

and ENCOURAGES the UN to set aside a considerable amount of its revenue as surplus resources, to be available in times of emergency.

I've tried submitting this to the U.N., only to have it taken down due to a branding problem. What should this be labelled as if it is proposed for the U.N.?

Sorry if this is the wrong place for this sort of thing, but the U.N. forum posters couldn't figure it out either.

Tossed to Moderation.

As for category, I have no clue. This is the third Proposal like this within the past couple weeks. First was Greun's about transparency, then Hirota's "charter", and now this. All three of these are Proposals that target the UN itself as opposed to member nations.

I'm tempted to just declair the lot illegal.

Why is it that any effort to place reasonable limits and checks on the activity of the UN is seen as illegal? Can't this body police itself? It passed "Rights and Responsibilities of Member Nations", which lays out the basic stuff that the UN is. What is wrong with it policing itself while it attempts to police others?

Is it not capable of stopping itself from action, even though it can stop other nations from action? It isn't like this proposal breaks game rules or anything.

It isn't like this proposal breaks game rules or anything.

Unfortunately, the problem is that it does, technically, break game rules. All proposals, when passed, have an effect on nations due to the way that stat changes work. So having a proposal that doesn't really affect nations.....doesn't seem to fit.

I think most would agree that this isn't a BAD area for the UN to legislate on, the problem is that within the confines of the game mechanics in place it is impossible. I suspect that Hack would've ruled it illegal without hesitation had it been any less of a good idea. Look at how long it took him to rule on ELC.

*not a mod*

As the author of Rights and Duties, I'm necessarily biased. Nonetheless, that preceded both the current ruleset and my elevation to Mod. Here's my take.

The UN proposal categories are the cornerstone of the UN. That's your starting point. Anything written for the UN should be based around one (and only one) category. It's fine to 'borrow' real world writing and try to adapt it to the NSUN, but the key word here is adapt.

You need to pick a category and write TO it, not write a proposal and try to TWIST the UN to your writing. This also means figuring out for yourself (or in the UN forum) how best to justify your chosen category. If you can sell your concept, we'll probably go along ... but don't keep starting "What category should I put this in?" threads. It's your job to figure out how to make it work, not ours.

We've added some new UN categories to incorporate new ideas into the stale set of existing categories. If you don't like the current set or you think we need some new ones, come up with a COMPLETE category and propose it in UN. Get some feedback, finetune it, hone it to perfection. If Hack or I (or one of the other mods) haven't commented in a week or two, you could poke us here and ask us to look over the thread. We do have other duties, you know. Try to solve these yourselves.