OOC: The veto power

[soysauce]

The logic of the UN Veto (if not all of the P5 agree then the UN could be taking sides in World War 3) doesn't really apply that much in the modern UNSC. The division of power in the particracy world is far less concentrated than its real world equivalent. I can't see why the veto would exist other than "it has always existed", or an emulation of the UNSC.

It does however advantage certain players, since a few Permanent Members have always been controlled by certain players they're both constantly on the SC and can veto anything.

[Pragma]

10000000% with soy

it really is a shit system open to abuse and since it's so important to the SC the burden is on the pro-veto people to say why it *improves* gameplay

[John Cracker]

I think it would be best to hold a vote on this subject, if we do perhaps have a % minimum (ie 60%) for what is required for it to be removed.

[Wu Han]

... the burden is on the pro-veto people to say why it *improves* gameplay

I agree, as someone who has long defended the veto as being an important vehicle for RP. Vague explanations for the veto power being a net-positive aren't really convincing to me any longer.

I don't see any meaningful way by which this power could be "limited." Every call in this thread for "limits" or "reform" seems to fail immediately after one is tasked with explaining what such reforms would look like, and how it would work in implementation.

Finally, as Soy notes, power simply isn't as concentrated (and I would add, polarized) in PT as it is in the real world. There exists practically no conflict nor differing motives among the permanent SC as it's composed now, contrasted with the RL SC.

I see no reason the veto shouldn't exist and has been used at very interesting points, in my opinion, throughout SC history. I see no reason to remove it.

I mean this in a genuinely curious sense — when? I have a few examples (Hutori's vetoes while I was in the SC) but not sure whether they helped RP, or if they were just personally beneficial. I might be more convinced if I saw the veto being used in a way that was dynamic or contributive to RP, but I can't think of one.

[John Cracker]

Perhaps a compromise would be a collective veto were if 2/3 of the permanent members vote NO then it is vetoed, basically they share the veto.

[jamescfm]

With the announcement that the rankings are no longer compulsory, the veto power has been abolished.