| Poll: Do you support? You do not have permission to vote in this poll. |
|||
| WA Delegate Elections | 3 | 17.65% | |
| A Unicameral Assembly | 1 | 5.88% | |
| Both | 2 | 11.76% | |
| Neither | 11 | 64.71% | |
| Total | 17 vote(s) | 100% | |
| * You voted for this item. | [Show Results] |
| Restoring the WA Electorate: Unicameral Assembly and Delegacy Elections |
|
Tsu, I totally agree with you. However, I think "baby steps" are better than "nosedive into the cliffs" kind of plans.
For example, Minister of Gameside Affairs is elected on-site (after a TG is sent to eligible nations letting them know of the new change). He or She asks the Delegate to TG all WA influential nations about discussions on how to get on-site nations more invested in the game. Gets some responses, runs a poll that is for them, etc. Having the Minister of Gameside Affairs elected on-site also helps test out the process. Escade ~ Positions Held in TSP ~ Delegate | Vice Delegate Minister of Regional Affairs, | Minister of Foreign Affairs | Minister of Military Affairs ~ The Sparkly One ~ My Pinterest
(01-31-2015, 06:54 PM)Escade Wrote: Tsu, I totally agree with you. However, I think "baby steps" are better than "nosedive into the cliffs" kind of plans. Ugh. I'm down for baby steps as well, Es. But, this is getting ridiculous. Bel's proposal regarding delegates being elected on the RMB isn't that radical and incredibly easy to implement.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
My proposal in regards to WA Delegate elections is a return to the historic roots of the Coalition. Strictly speaking it's reactionary not radical.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator ![[Image: B9ytUsy.png]](https://i.imgur.com/B9ytUsy.png) (01-31-2015, 04:41 PM)Unibot Wrote:Quote:I strongly oppose the inclusion of allowing multiple people to hold a single Cabinet office. This is not necessary, and it seems like a way to sneak in a policy change you want on the coattails of a separate reform. Tsu, when I first saw this bill I was more favorable towards it but wanted to reread. I'm glad GR got there first. However, it's things like trying to sneak in other legislation and hope people don't read it that really really annoys me. It really really bothers me enough to think that without actually looking at each change individually and then discussing ramifications who knows what other "shady or open to misinterpretation" kind of language there is. Escade ~ Positions Held in TSP ~ Delegate | Vice Delegate Minister of Regional Affairs, | Minister of Foreign Affairs | Minister of Military Affairs ~ The Sparkly One ~ My Pinterest
Tsu, it *is* radical. Every proposal here is radical for a GCR. It may be closer to what you experienced 10 years ago, but it's vastly different from how GCR governments have worked since I started playing. We don't have foreign relations with TWP because their philosophy of government is basically the same as yours, so let's not downplay how much of a change is being proposed here.
Glen, it's broadly similar to how this region elected Delegates until two years ago.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator
(01-31-2015, 09:19 PM)Sandaoguo Wrote: Tsu, it *is* radical. Every proposal here is radical for a GCR. It may be closer to what you experienced 10 years ago, but it's vastly different from how GCR governments have worked since I started playing. We don't have foreign relations with TWP because their philosophy of government is basically the same as yours, so let's not downplay how much of a change is being proposed here. It's not radical and -- as Bels has pointed out -- for much of TSP's history we elected delegates from the RMB. The problem -- as I see it -- is that you've gotten confused on the basics of the game. The government and everything created on top of the region is great, but still needs to the region to function. For clarification, that's not the same as TWP's stance, as I've understood it, because I still see the offsite as incredibly important and the seat of the government. But, I'm not ignorant enough to pretend like the in-game mechanisms don't matter and, in fact, recognize the basic fact that without controlling the region in NS, we don't have a region.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
Electing delegates through a game-side poll, and granting non-citizens legislative power, is radical. It's not how GCR governments typically work, let alone most other regions that have forum-based governments. What other region of our size and import would work this way?
@Tsu: That is definitely where we split in our views. I do not think the mechanics of the WA Delegate seat in the game are all that important to how the forum community functions. Very, very little of what we do relies on the game mechanics of the region. I think the way you see things, while a popular view and an intuitive one, doesn't match how forum-based governments work in practice. The WA Delegate seat is, to me, simply a convenient symbol. We could have a caretaker nation be WA Delegate for life, sharing its password with the relevant TSP leaders, and literally nothing would change in the forum game. Quote: I do not think the mechanics of the WA Delegate seat in the game are all that important to how the forum community functions. This is just a failure on the part of TSP's government to stay relevant to its own people. As for this proposal, I won't support it while Belschaft is using it as an opportunity to stuff all these unnecessary reforms that he wants passed. That's just dirty pool and really kind of disgusting behavior -- he knows better. |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
PREVIOUS ROLES 
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |