I don't think there is a case for not having an endorsement cap. As I see it, the real discussion is how high it should be and how violations should be dealt with.

Here we have a relatively low cap, when considering how Tsunamy has been gathering much more endorsements. Our current cap was instituted when the Delegate had around 220 endorsements, so it made sense to keep the cap at its current levels. With the Delegate currently averaging 360 endorsements, it makes sense to raise the cap to at least 200 endorsements, and perhaps even more.

However, there should be no case for letting someone remain (and again this is for the sake of argument) within 10 endorsements of the Delegate, a range that is dangerously close and could result in someone illegally, though possibly inadvertently, taking the delegacy. If we take this example to its logical conclusion, we would have to say that nobody should be within 10 endorsements of the Delegate. That is cap. One so high that it would be meaningless in 99% of all cases, but a cap nonetheless.

Regarding TNP

Their Security Council monitors nations exceeding (a) 2/3 of the Vice Delegate's endorsement count (b) the endorsement counts of the Council © rapidly gaining endorsements (d) belonging to notable groups or (e) who raise some kind of suspicion.

That is in some way an endorsement cap, even if not in the same way we have historically implemented it in this region. It's a soft cap that relies on common sense, friendly interaction and reasonable leeway, but it's a cap nonetheless. Those nations are eventually asked, in a friendly manner as per their regulations, what their intentions are, and given advice on getting involved in regional governance, or on how to keep a secure endorsement count.

That is an approach that I have actually suggested our own Committee for State Security adopt, as anyone with access to Lubyanka might confirm. I don't think we are in a situation where we should simply warn and eject an endorsement cap violator, when making them partners in maintaining regional security would be a much more effective approach. That means encouraging them to accumulate a reasonably high endorsement count, while having them understand why exactly it is important to stay clear of, most notably, the Delegate's count.

The bottomline is there should be a common sense limit to how many endorsements a nation should gain in order to not risk overtaking the Delegate's count. It need not be NPO low, it may well be TNP ambiguous/high, but it needs to be there, so there's something people can look up when in doubt.

--

Having said this, the specifics of an endorsement cap are something not really pertaining to this Great Council, and would probably be best discussed in the CSS public area.