A student attempt to mimic the activities of the real United Nations. Typically this includes preparing resolutions for the interests of countries and arguing for them. It is divided into several commitees, such as the Disarmament Committee, the General Assembly, ECOSOC, etc. The big problem is that the students have no idea what the real interests of the nations they are supposed to represent are, which makes for some very interesting resolutions. I will now quote my little trip to Holland.

I was privileged enough to be part of such a gathering in January, 1999, at The Hague (den Haag) in Holland. Unfortunately, our school sucked so much we were picked to represent Comoros. Incidentally, Comoros is the world's second largest producer of vanilla, but not much else. They are also entangled in a little incident with French mercenaries, where they took over one of their four islands.

Anyways, by the end of the first day, we already experienced some very amusing incidents. For a smaller gathering, such stupitiy would have been alright. However, this MUN (Model United Nations) had over 3000 delegates. Maybe it should have at least some kind of intelligent argument. It didn't. Amusing incidents include:

  1. Syria, Israel and Palestine created a peace resolution, without even mentioning the Gaza Strip and the the presence of Israeli military police, instead concentrating on the insistance of peace "for the sake of it".

  2. Two delegates attempted to "motion to requisition for a new chair" and were ejected from the assembly, by the chair.

  3. China and the USA co-sponsored a resolution to share all technology, including (laugh) military technology.

I myself also managed to piss the chair off for authoring and sponsoring a resolution (sponsored by Libya and Iraq, hehe) that called for "concentration of efforts on disarmament on regular assualt weapons instead of land mines", quoting the Diana legacy as the cause of all the attention on mines. People quickly called me unemotional and cruel. I gave statistics on war casualties caused by guns and compared them to land-mines in Third World countries.

It was in vain. Our resolution was defeated by a vote of (as I remember) 3 - 157.

Oh well, so much for that. I proceeded to spend the next two days in a foggy haze in the streets of Amsterdam, frequenting the coffeehouses and wandering into the red light district once in a while. As I recall, the sex museum was very very enlightening.

All in all, it was a fascinating experience.

Model UN is an extracurricular activity that enacts UN-like sessions with high school students. Each school is assigned a country, and the students involved are delegates for different committees from that country, much like the real United Nations. Each student researches their country's policies (this can be quite difficult to do if you get, say, Romania) on various things. They then attempt to model those policies in this committee environment.

For me, Model UN was a good taste of the flaws of democracy and committees. In my senior year of high school, I was the delegate for North Korea (ok, the People's Democratic Republic of Korea), on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) committee. Just one week before the session was to occur, North Korea was involved in an incident where they were suspected of possessing the Bomb. I had a lot of fun - I tripped delegates up on their research, I stopped progress from being made, I argued against things and then for them. The only resolution passed was one with a huge hole in it for "my people" to manipulate.

All in all, a ton of fun.

From personal experience with Model UN, there are two possible goals from any given model UN conference. The first is to have fun. This is actually easiest when you are a controversial country, like Cuba, or DPR Korea. This way, you get to yell at people, and make fun of them, and sometimes make everybody laugh.

The other course of action is to get a warm and fuzzy feeling inside. Even if you only artificially make a step towards curing terrorism, world hunger, or creating world peace, it makes you feel good and hopeful.

Here is the official definition of Model UN from the United Nations Association of the United States of America:
(http://www.unausa.org/)

"Model United Nations is an authentic simulation of the UN General Assembly, UN Security Council, or other multilateral body, which catapults students into the world of diplomacy and negotiation.
In Model UN, students step into the shoes of ambassadors of UN member states, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe to debate current issues on the Organization's vast agenda.
The students, better known as "delegates" in Model UN, prepare draft resolutions, plot strategy, negotiate with supporters and adversaries, resolve conflicts, and navigate the UN's rules of procedure-all in the interest of mobilizing "international cooperation" to resolve problems that affect almost every country on Earth. Before playing out their ambassadorial roles in Model UN, students do research on the particular global problems to be addressed. The problems are drawn from today's headlines. Model UN "delegates" also look closely at the needs, aspirations, and foreign policy of the country they will "represent" at the event."


Having attended six MUN conferences myself, and been one of the principal organisers of one, I'd say that the above write-up is a better description of MUN as it exists at some levels.

However, it is important to realise what the aims are: to encourage students to think about the needs and views of people who may hold fundamentally opposed views to their own, and to make them argue for those people. When done properly, MUN can be one of the most eye-opening experiences available. Even when done badly, it is at the very least great great fun!
The real goal of Model UN is actually to come away with a gavel. These are awarded to delegates (or delegations) that perform well during the conference, i.e. staying true to their country's ideology and acting like a UN representative should.

One thing that hasn't been touched here is the concept of a crisis committee, every MUN veteran's favorite kind. The idea behind crisis committees is that instead of passing resolutions regarding equal rights or helping African countries get cheaper AIDS drugs, you're doing something invaluable, namely resolving crises.

Well, not exactly.

In a crisis committee, you will have an agenda like normal committees. However, while discussing the topics in question, a "crisis" will pop up. The delegates then have to manage the crisis successfully, and are judged on their ability to think creatively and under pressure.

Example: In my freshman year of high school, I was a young and optimistic delegate in my school's MUN club. Nearly everyone else (mostly a few other freshmen and lots of sophmores) seemed to only care about getting their activity credit. Because this was such a popular club, our school was awarded three countries: Germany, Costa Rica*, and Iraq. I chose to join a senior (who is now curing cancer at Harvard) in representing Germany in NATO. By the way, the conference in question was ILMUNC, the Ivy League Model United Nations Conference, hosted by the University of Pennsylvania.

Our original topics were NATO's relationship with the European Union, NATO's relationship with Austria, and a third topic that escapes me. The first meeting was setting the agenda and discussing whether or not we wanted to contribute to a possible EU peacekeeper army. Soon, however, we were halted by the chair to recieve news: There had been a disasterous earthquake in Turkey, and many were killed. The Turkish delegate, milking it for all it's worth, called for a moment of silence. We then spent five minutes debating how long the moment of silence should be. I wish I were kidding. Though we tried to get back on track, we were plagued with other problems. First, the NATO website was "hacked" (they passed around a laptop with a simulated display). Then, word came that Kurds living in Turkey weren't getting the help they needed. Soon, an exodus began as thousands of Kurds swam across the Mediteranean in search of help. We were shown a live reenactment of refugees being shot by Italian border guards. Despite this, the refugees invaded the European coastline, and we were kept informed through "newspapers" and fake wire reports. Casualties included the German Olympic Women's Vollyball squad, and the Parthenon. Yes, some refugees wanted shelter from a storm. They piled rocks, which happened to put a lot of weight onto a column. You are reading this correctly, they destroyed the Parthenon.

One thing I forgot to mention was the concept of the midnight crisis. In conferences that have this, you will most likely know ahead of time. In one of the initial sessions, they will ask for your name and hotel room, under the guise of security. At ILMUNC, they even claimed that they couldn't do midnight crises anymore due to noise concerns. Midnight crises are like normal ones, except that they do not happen during regularly scheduled sessions. No, you will recieve a phone call sometime around 12 to 2AM, and you will be expected to get your ass down to the conference room.

Unfortunately, ILMUNC rules dictated that each country only sent one representative to NATO. I was transferred to Germany's WHO delegation, which meant that I missed my midnight crisis. Though I was dissapointed, I also managed to get our group in gear, and though the German delegation had apparently slacked for two days, we ended up co-sponsoring a resolution that got passed by ECOSOC in the pleniary session. As a result of internal politics, I left the MUN club after that year.

Now, however, I am in college, and The Rock is fielding an MUN team. I am representing Niger in the WHO as we head to bitter cold Montreal to partake in Mcgill University's MUN conference. I somehow suspect that my experience in dealing with MUN on a college level will make it to E2, so stay tuned.

In 1987, 1988 and 1989 I participated as a delegate to the National Model United Nations, which is held in New York City. Most sessions are, or were, held at the Grand Hyatt Hotel, located above Grand Central Station, and a short walk from the UN Building itself. Opening and plenary sessions were held in the UN building itself, using the same chairs and equipment as actual UN Diplomats. An important and well-known diplomat serves as keynote speaker for the opening session. Delegations came from colleges and universities across the United States, but also from Europe and Japan.

The National Model United Nations is serious, and most schools make a good attempt to prepare. The value of the simulation in part depends upon an accurate potrayal of each country's foriegn policy for that can teach idealistic college students how hard it is to get a deal done. Some schools are very serious, including Georgetown and my own, Wright State University. During those years I had the honor to represent Venezuela, the Soviet Union and West Germany. All were on the Security Council at that time, and though they are not permanent members, both Venezuela and Germany were regular Council members. Each year, the delegation I was part of was named Outstanding Delegation, and at least one of my teammates is now part of the US State Department. Which explains the plum country assignments. In those days there was a Soviet Union and if the superpowers are played poorly, the simulation falls apart. Therefore only schools with top reuptations (eg Wright State, Georgetown, West Point) get the most important countries.

For us the selection process began with smarter students in the political science classes being encouraged to try out for the team. The candidate would enter a room full of senior UN Team members, and assigned to defend a very difficult foreign policy against the more experienced students. I was told to defend Russian arms sales in the Third World and to pretend I was an afrikaaner diplomat defending apartheid. Which proved to be fun as the debate was qute spirited, as the old team members tried not only to defeat me, but to rattle me with rapid fire questions.

Having survived that, you get your country and committe assignments and prepare. One of the UN staffers, generally a graduate student in international relations, will prepare a position paper on the topics that will debated at the each year's simulation. The question of Cyprus and nuclear disarmament were two issues I remember. These white papers were well written primers on the subject and the basic arguments to be debated.

Then you research. The nearest UN document depository was at Indiana University, so we'd pile into our cars on a Saturday morning and car pool to Bloomington. There I'd exame documents using the indexes, and if it looked at all useful, it went directly to the copier. I could read the stuff back in Dayton, prioritizing. We would read and re-read the translated speeches of our country on each of the topics at hand, until we could almost recite them. During seminar we practiced speaking and parliamentary procedure, with emphasis on the Nasty, Embarassing Question, and how to wriggle out of one. And we worked on our White Paper.

Each college delegation is expected to prepare a foreign policy white paper for the nation they are represented. The document should succinctly and accurately states the foreign policy positions of the country you are represented. Ours was edited three times. At Wright State, we not only send a copy to the NMUN, but also to the mission of the country we represented. That can pay off, when you are in New York and have your mission briefing, you're one chance to ask questions of the real people you simulate. The Venezuelan Ambassador came across our and mistook it for an internal mission document. When he discovered it had been written by a bunch of midwestern college students, our mission briefing turned into a party. Every single member of the Venezuelan UN mission was there to meet us. Including the Ambassador. They critqued our paper, answered our questions, and then we had drinks together.

That felt good!

Then the UN starts with the opening sessions, with an address by an important UN official. One year it was Brian Urqhart who is one of the world's most important peace negotiators, and his speech seemed particularly important during the Cold War.

Then you get started. The problem comes when people don't play their part properly. Early on we had a crisis in my committe, when the students playing Greece and Turkey got together and submitted a joint resolution that essentially solved the question of Cyprus.

As a Venezuelan diplomat, of course I would have been delighted that those two countries had decided to put aside ancient emnities in the name of reason. But really I was horrified, as it pushed aside the most important issue in my committee. So I approached the Greek representative and congratulated him warmly on his 'forward thinking, particularly your willingness to set aside enosis.'

He turned purple, realizing what he had done. Enosis, or unification between Cyprus and Greece is one of the central tenets of Greek foreign policy. In Greece, the issue is passionate, and disputing it constitutes fighting words. A half an hour later the accord had fallen apart, and the Greek faculty advisor personally thanked me for saving their butt. I was feeling pretty good when I finally got to the bar.

Bars deserve mention. Bars stayed open until four AM in New York. We were there, often until closing, even though we had to be in our suits and on the floors at eight AM. Lots of drinking, and even some lobbying though you could drop character . A little. You don't sleep much during the NMUN.

Another episode came the following year during a disarmament resolution. I represented the Soviet Union. This was a period of time when Mikhail Gorbachev was genuinely trying to ramp down the Cold War in order to free up some cash the Soviet economy. Plus, peaceful proposals offset the "evil empire" rhetoric Ronald Reagan constantly used to describe the Soviet Union. The Soviets had moved a long way during the previous six months. In fact, the Soviets were in actuality leading the world toward disarmament, if for no other reason than to save money.

And the United States delegation made a mistake. This often happens when college students are lobbied, they feel pressured to compromise. But diplomats are not sent out to compromise, but to represent their country. They US delegation put forward a "we will specify our arms if you specify yours" proposal. The real Reagan Administration would never have done that, and as Soviet representative I faced a problem. The Soviet Government had not made that offer, it wasn't on any table, though in one speech Gorbachev had used language suggesting that he might consider something vaguely similar. Considering the direction Russian policy was heading, I decided that the real Soviets would have taken the offer, and signed up.

The Ukraine refused to go along with me. It was too radical, though less radical than the Ukraine voting against the Soviet Union. We had a big argument, and already upset over a romantic problem, (an unrequited crush on a teammate) I challenged their faculty advisor to a debate on Soviet foreign policy. That wasn' t wise, but I turned out to be right as a few weeks later. The Soviets made virtually the same proposal I had agreed to! My faculty advisor sent Ukraine's a copy of the proposal, just to make the point. I felt vindicated and by then I had a new girlfriend.

I really enjoyed the NMUN experience. It was a chance to step outside my skin, and I learned a lot about the issues I debated, the foreign policies of other countries, and the diplomatic process. It helped train students about the reality of international politics, that it is a dirty process loaded with embedded interests and emotions.

just swing it is wrong. The best way to have fun is to choose an important country, or a smaller country with a centrist position. That way you get to lobby and write legislation. Belonging to an extremist country makes it too easy to act like a caricature.

The Model United Nations is an organization based upon teaching people like me. In other words High school on up to College. Although in the node Model United Nations quality information is given, there are no examples on how a policy paper may look like. This is an example of a policy paper done on Russia for the committee World Summit on Sustainable Development. Please note, in this paper any time it refers to "We" it is referring to the Russian Federation, with my opinion of their standpoint.

Guidelines and information on how to write a Policy paper consult Writing MUN Policy. Examples are used from this paper. Please also see MUN parliamentary procedure to find out how to present in MUN committees.

Policy Example:
We, the Government of the Russian Federation considers integration of environmental and social parameters in the national development strategy and practical implementation of the concept of sustainable development as matters of utmost importance. (UN 2001) We are delighted to help the world through the WORLD SUMMIT on SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (WSSD), wish to help the committee by discussing the following topics: Access to Safe Drinking Water, Climate Change, and Responsible Globalization. We feel that Responsible Globalization is the most important, followed by Climate Change, and then Access to Safe Drinking Water. Responsible Globalization will help the world the most, and will take care of the other two problems along with it. Global companies that try to spend less in developing their products in developing countries around the world are the main cause for Irresponsible Globalization. We believe setting world standards to keep other problems from arising is the key goal in obtaining Responsible Globalization. As a Federal Multiparty Republic, we are willing to work with the world to fix problems that not only occur in Russia, but around the world.

Responsible Globalization
We the Russian Federation of whom possessing 148,518,500 people on 6,592,800 Miles of land have needs along with the rest of the world to Globalize Responsibly. (Altapedia 2000) We feel that most of the world is currently not Globalizing Responsibly. Pollution from industries in countries around the world is a result of Irresponsible Globalization. This pollution is brought in by investors building factories who have Unchecked Emissions. This is a problem in Russia, a metal ore smelting complex near Monchegorsk, continues to pollute the air and water. To fix this problem we have opted to use Nuclear energy. Safe and efficient to today’s standards. It in turn Responsibly Globalizes the world. Other companies around the world that are being built up are also Irresponsible cases of Globalization as they are causing more pollution and other factors that are harmful. Nuclear Energy solves that problem. It is estimated at least one in five Russian babies born today is in poor health. This is also in part because of Irresponsible Globalization. (Ailing Mother Russia 1994) By eliminating Irresponsible Globalization and turning it into Responsible Globalization, the Climate Change and Access to Safe Drinking Water factors because of the Green House Effect and harmful emissions can be maintained and halted.

Globalization may be a way to eliminate poverty, but with companies taking advantage of third world countries because it will cost less to run the company there, it is another case of Irresponsible Globalization. They don’t even care about the working conditions, nor does the country as they are happy to have work for their people, even if it is harmful. (UNESCO 2002) We believe that the UN and WSSD can get rid of these factors by creating laws on safe environments and higher working standards, or countries can not invest their companies without regulations being met.

We as a country used to be communist. When it fell the only economic system was capitalism. We are now apart of this economic system and see to it that our economics goals are shared with the world from a capitalistic view. (Dictionary 2000)

Responsible Globalization is a world factor. Cases or Irresponsible Globalization can be fixed and turned into Responsible cases. To do this pacts between the three organizations need to be made and kept to turn it around. We are apart of the World Bank (WB), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). We believe that the UN has rights to make laws to regulate the global economy, and to create sustainable and responsible globalization. We think that laws to regulate globalization to increase health, happiness, and world peace, should be maintained and created as needed. The UN should be very involved in these regulations to obtain high standards for Russia and the world. Money is always the bottom factor to every problem, funds can be made up in difference when companies are paying third world countries satisfactory pay to create their products. This creates Responsible Globalization, and the health and happiness of the world is increased.

Climate Change
We, the Russian Federation, find that Climate temperature is rising, causing farmlands to die and water to evaporate. Certain things cause this to happen: Climate Change such as Global warming is occurring, which is the key problem. This is due to emission of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels. This results in trapped heat in the atmosphere, which increases average global temperatures all together. The long term results can be devastating, causing in result the economy of the world to go into depression. Whether or not it can be proved that Green House emissions are the cause of this, we feel it would be good to try to decrease the output. (EPA 2002)

The Russian Federation considers the development of nuclear energy as an important component of its energy strategy and an economically viable, safe and environmentally clean source of energy. One of the advantages of nuclear energy is the absence of harmful emissions, first of all greenhouse gases, to the atmosphere. At present, the countries that opted for nuclear energy have accumulated significant experience in ensuring its safety, including environmental safety. (UN 2001)

We are a developed country, however, it would hurt our economy to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases. It would be rather costly for us to produce automobiles with catalytic converter, which lower the emissions, or other factors of improving factories or shutting them down. We could not afford to have power plants with air refining systems. The Russian Delegation believes that the discussion should be focused on the identification of optimal ways to improve the effectiveness and practical results of the activities of the existing structures of international environmental governance for all Member-States. What we can do is better enforce already existing proposals. An example of this is having people drive cars less, maybe take the public transportation once in a while? (Climate 2002)

Russia has committed to ratify the Kyoto Protocol despite the pressure exerted by the Bush Administration. (World Resources Institute 2002) The Kyoto Protocol, named after the city where it was negotiated, needs to be ratified by at least 55 parties to the treaty, including rich countries which contribute 55 percent of the world's output of climate-changing carbon dioxide. As of August 30, 2002, 89 countries have ratified the Kyoto Protocol, including countries which account for 37.1 percent of carbon dioxide emissions. The Russian Federation contributes 17.4 percent of the world's emissions, leaving only 0.5 percent before the treaty can come into full force. (World Resources Institute 2002) In spite of serious difficulties of the transition period, Russia is fulfilling its main Rio commitments. The emissions of greenhouse gases in Russia have been reduced by 25% as compared to 1990. Since 1992, the area of natural sanctuaries and other special protected natural territories has been increased by more than 1.7 times. (UN 2001)

We feel that Climate Change is a factor to be dealt with accordingly; UN regulations have been made and should be kept. The Kyoto Protocol when in full effect will help the cause of Green House Emissions and perhaps lower the chance of global Climate Change. With the hope for a better future, and less Climate Change, we the Russian Federation are doing their part to help the world.

Access to Safe Drinking Water
The natural resources of our country play a significant role in the preservation of global environmental equilibrium providing unique environmental services of global magnitude. 25% of world's freshwater reserves are located on the territory of Russia. Russian boreal forests absorb annually more than 200 million tons of carbon from the atmosphere. (UN)

We have 99% of Russia to have Access to improved and Safe Drinking Water. (WB 1999) We feel as though all countries have the right to drink fresh and clean water, and the world should help those in need. Bottled water, even though expensive, is one possible way to reach those in need of clean drinking water.

Laws enforced by the UN need to be ensured to continue private companies, and national governments to continue and improve safe methods of industrialization to keep the Access of Safe Drinking Water out to all of the world. Factories that defile laws should be closed and/or improved. In our country an Aspirin factory was polluting the water of our people, we closed it and only reopened it a month later because the entire country had no access to the medication. Access to Safe Drinking Water should be behind the health of people of the world. But by improving the Water, health is improved. By this order does Russia stand. (Ailing Mother Russia 1994)

The Russian Federation considers the development of nuclear energy as an important component of its energy strategy and an economically viable, safe and environmentally clean source of energy. One of the advantages of nuclear energy is the absence of harmful emissions, first of all greenhouse gases, to the atmosphere. Thus this will create more Safe Drinking Water. At present, the countries that opted for nuclear energy have accumulated significant experience in ensuring its safety, including environmental safety. This is the thrust of the relevant Russia's initiative submitted by President Vladimir Putin at the Millennium Summit. (UN 2001)

We are taking more steps to get Access to Safe Drinking Water to more of our people. To do this we are closing and improving factories that pollute our water. We do not have a problem with lack of water, or water shortages because we hold 25% of the world’s fresh water. We believe that by taking action against pollution, and by improving cleaning facilities and/or building these facilities where needed and necessary, that we, the Russian Federation will increase Access to Safe Drinking Water across our nation’s people. (UN 2001)


All policy papers should have sources or a cite page.

  • Saunders, Paul. Why "Globalization" Didn’t Rescue Russia. Policy Review Online. 11 January 2002. http://www.policyreview.org/feb01/saunders.html
  • Gazeta, Nezavisimaya. GLOBALISATION AND RELATIONS BETWEEN THE WEST AND THIRD COUNTRIES. Russia Weekly. June 2002. 11 January 2002. http://www.cdi.org/Russia/212-12.cfm
  • Background Note: Russia. Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs. October 2002. 11 January 2002.http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3183.htm
  • Clay, Rebecca. The Ailing Mother Russia. Environmental Health Perspectives, Volume 102, Number 2, February 1994. 11 January 2002. http://ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/docs/1994/102-2/focus1.html
  • Altapedia. Latimer Clarke Corporation. 2001. 11 January 2002. http://www.atlapedia.com/online/countries/russia.htm
  • Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations. Statement by Mr. Amirkhan M. Amirkhanov. April 18, 2001. 11 January 2002. http://www.un.int/russia/statemnt/ecosoc/c_susdev/01_04_18.htm#english
  • Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations. Statement by H.E. Mr. Sergey V.Lavrov. 11 January 2002. http://www.un.int/russia/statemnt/ecosoc/c_susdev/01_04_19.htm#english
  • Climate Change. 10 January 2003. http://www.isanet.org/archive/perovic.html
  • The American Heritage. Russia Defined. Houghton Mifflin Company. 2000. 11 January 2002.
  • http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Russia
  • UNESCO. Globalisation. 11 January 2002.
  • http://www.unesco.org/most/globalisation/Introduction.htm
  • The Russian Federation Data Profile. The World Bank Group. April 2002. 11 January 2002.http://devdata.worldbank.org/external/CPProfile.asp?SelectedCountry=RUS&CCODE=RUS&CNAME=Russian+Federation&PTYPE=CP
  • The Conventional and Kyoto Protocol. (UNFCCC). 11 January 2002. http://unfccc.int/resource/convkp.html
  • Global Warming. (EPA) Environmental Protection Agency. October 2nd, 2002. 11 January 2002. http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/index.html
  • NEWS RELEASE: WRI praises Russia's commitment to ratify Kyoto Protocol. Updated weekly. WRI. 13 January 2003. http://climate.wri.org/newsrelease_text.cfm?NewsReleaseID=133
  • International Monetary Fund. About the IMF. 13 January 2003. Http://www.imf.org/external/about.htm
  • World Trade Organization. The WTO in brief. 13 January 2003. http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/inbrief_e/inbr00_e.htm


Please see the following for more information regarding MUN. Brigham Young University, Writing MUN Policy, MUN parliamentary procedure. I wrote a Resolution which passed in the (WSSD) committee, it is apart of the parliamentary procedure node. Also see January 18, 2003 and January 19, 2003 nodes for a feel of how the BYU campus and area works.

Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.