Firstly, plagiarism. As Kenny brought up here, the current WA resolution (Liberate Democratia) is "nothing more than a copy of Liberate Belgium, with some key words replaced". Proposals which plagiarise others should be deleted - resolutions should be original, and actually require some thought on behalf of the author, and it would mean that we don't just have a list of passed resolutions which are virtually identical.
Secondly, branding. We haven't had a problem yet, but it can't be long before we have a proposal which is co-authored by half of NationStates. I'm not talking about removing mentions of region/nations/organisations from resolutions - just that there can't be more than one co-author for a resolution. The GA has that rule in place for a good reason - because otherwise everyone who makes a suggestion towards changing a proposal would end up credited in it.
I also wouldn't mind seeing this upgraded to an actual law, so that if you violate it, your proposal is deleted:
Ardchoille wrote:They're a picky lot, the delegates. Here are some possible reasons why they've ignored your proposal:
Action:
1. You didn’t say what action you wanted the SC to take. You should clearly say in the text of your resolution, not just in the panels at the top, “The Security Council condemns (or commends) the nation (or region) @@NAME@@.”
2. You asked the SC to perform an extra action, eg, “Condemns @@NAME@@ and sows their fields with salt”.
Surely having a resolution which doesn't claim to do anything, or which claims to do things which it cannot do should be grounds for it being deleted, rather than just relying on delegates?
I know the desire is for delegates to police resolutions themselves, so that we have a minimal amount of laws, which lets the SC be used by all NS communities - and so allowing condemnations on the basis of ideology, or resolutions based on dubious facts is fine. However, the things mentioned above really shouldn't just be left to delegates.
EDIT: A slightly better summary - these wouldn't restrict what the SC can act upon, just regulate better how it acts.