Framing the Coalition as an umbrella entity that helps manage and regulate various spheres of influence would need quite possibly a GC and extensive parsing of our current laws. However, I am not averse to the idea because the game has changed in a multitude of ways and continues to evolve which means we too should be open to change.

Two things are being discussed here which are 1. The desire to reimagine the management of gameside for The South Pacific so that is is more organic and stems from the gameside rather than from the forum side as it currently seems to and 2. The potential management or TSP Coalition serving to assist UCR members (colonies may not be the best term, protectorates perhaps or ?)

1.
Local Councillors, as they currently operate, do not seem as effective because of the forum push and pull and in an ideal world are those players who are active game side but not forum side. Then there is the issue of representation in a region of 3000 with approximately 721 WAs - how does one account for full representation?

Things that we have to think about are - what are some possible models that the gameside may adopt? Does the coalition maintain control over Delegacy and Cabinet\RO positions through the forums or? Does the forum determine the Delegate and cabinet entirely? And the Local Government liasons with the forum side but doesn't impact it via game side polls? Or do we want to allow the gameside Local government to send a representative to serve as an RO? Or to participate in each elected position after the forums or concurrently or?

These kinds of questions need to be thought out. Should the delegate position, which is heading there anyway, become a year long position for example to be even more stable (and therefore keep gameside and UCRs from worrying about potential coups)?

2.
Looking at The Western Isle and a few other UCRs, such as Forest (linked here -> https://www.nationstates.net/region=forest) with minimal forums or no forum presence at all, I notice a few common trends: 1. A high use of dispatches to record history\laws\maps\timelines\events 2. TWI uses the NS forums for Roleplay\introduce your nations and nation leaders and 3. Forest while not partaking in R\D directly does state that they may partake in liberations for embassied allies.

If we are considering becoming an Umbrella entity, then we must also think about it in terms of:
1. How does this benefit TSP (or the Coalition)? For me the benefit lies in allies who are willing to come to the defense of us and also perhaps support military missions as well as the opportunity for more cultural activites including roleplays\writing and collaborations. Having recently interviewed members of the outgoing and incoming cabinet, one common sentiment is desiring having enough people who follow through on commitments and keep projects sustainable.

2. How would UCRs benefit from our assistance in management? We may have to talk to UCRs more directly about this but I can think of 1. Defense from a GCR 2. Assistance with lulls in activity through cross-collaboration and 3. More opportunities to get participants from multiple like-minded (as in democratic) regions to participate.

Would anyone who is actively (politically) involved in one or more GCrs and a UCR (?) want to comment on or provide their perspective on this? How might the relationship look from your end? What benefits would you want and what assurances or control would you want?

Questions that remain:
1. What do we do in situations that blur the forum and game-side? I've usually been involved in both (for example for Inter-Regional Games and such). Am I now a picking a side and then trying to find someone from the other side to help\work with me or am I continuing on?
2. I really like the idea of actually making an Umbrella forum that has sub-forums for other UCRs who's own forums are pretty dead or otherwise need serious activity boosts. However, what if they want to leave the partnership or secede from the Union so to speak?