| Bringing Sunshine Back to TSP |
Please, everyone stop.
This isn't a public thread in the assembly where we will argue the merits of admins and whether or not they should be in politics. Please take it somewhere else is that's what your looking for. If you have questions for Tsu and I, please feel free to post them. Semi-Unretired
What are your plans for the South Pacific's World Assembly ministry?
Do you have any ideas for how to foster regional involvement in the GA and SC, such as encouraging participation in the WA forums (both here and game-side), providing assistance with drafting, or regional collaboration on a specific proposal topic? How do you intend to vote on GA and SC resolutions? Will you vote in accordance with the regional vote, an in-game poll, a forum-side poll, or will you simply vote according to your personal views?
Would you be supportive of a plan to make the Delegate and VD positions less political and more game side?
Above all else, I hope to be a decent person.
Has Been What's Next? CoA: August 2016-January 2017
Minister of Foreign Affairs: October 2019-June 2020, October 2020- February 2021
Thanks for the questions guys. I'm answering on my accord; DM can answer as he sees fit.
(02-14-2016, 03:02 PM)Railana Wrote: What are your plans for the South Pacific's World Assembly ministry? I have no plan for the WA ministry, nor do I plan to attempt to foster regional involvement outside of what people independently want to do. Previously — namely wen Glen ran for MoFA — he wanted to push more WA proposals, and I would welcome the FA ministry doing that. However, I anticipate I'll have too much on my plate to really worry about that the moment. Regarding GA and SC votes, unless there are extenuating circumstances, in the past I have voted in the way the region is voting. I plan to continue that. (02-14-2016, 07:07 PM)Omega Wrote: Would you be supportive of a plan to make the Delegate and VD positions less political and more game side? Yes, I would absolutely be in support of that, Omega. I believe I penned an Assembly thread arguing in favor of such a set up, but I sincerely believe it would be in the best interests of the region to follow through with such a proposal.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
(02-14-2016, 03:02 PM)Railana Wrote: What are your plans for the South Pacific's World Assembly ministry? While I think a WA Ministry would be a great way to get the region more involved, I don't think we will have the time to focus on it during this short term. Since we have the Great Council coming up, I would like to see more regional involvement in that. In the past, and recently, I have seen threads created with polls where the GA or SC Resolutions up for vote are debated, and the region votes yay or nay on how the Delegate should cast the regional vote. Similar to how Tsu does it now, only based on the forum poll. This would be a good way to get regional members involved, or having an in game poll for the same thing could be fun, with RMB debates. (02-14-2016, 07:07 PM)Omega Wrote: Would you be supportive of a plan to make the Delegate and VD positions less political and more game side? I'll agree with Tsu on this as well, that the idea of making the Delegate/Vice Delegate positions less political and focusing them on the game side more. I have seen a few resolutions proposed that make the Delegate position completely in game only, and creating another position for off site forum focus. (Prime Minister) I am truly focused on getting the game side of The South Pacific more involved, and making the Delegate a more in game focused position would be a big step. Semi-Unretired
You both voted in favor of overturning Belschaft's security threat designation. Should this matter end up before the Cabinet, can voters expect that your votes will remain in favor of overturning that security threat designation, if elected Delegate and Vice Delegate?
(02-15-2016, 08:56 AM)Cormac Wrote: You both voted in favor of overturning Belschaft's security threat designation. Should this matter end up before the Cabinet, can voters expect that your votes will remain in favor of overturning that security threat designation, if elected Delegate and Vice Delegate? For the record, I'm both surprised and disappointed that this didn't pass the Assembly. I would never have exposed Bel to that liability if I didn't believe strongly that he's no longer a security threat. I also find it amazing that someone can literally restore the region from a coup, and still be a security threat. At the moment, I want to evaluate my options before announcing that I'd support action from the Cabinet. But, I think my feelings on Bel's status are clear.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
(02-15-2016, 08:56 AM)Cormac Wrote: You both voted in favor of overturning Belschaft's security threat designation. Should this matter end up before the Cabinet, can voters expect that your votes will remain in favor of overturning that security threat designation, if elected Delegate and Vice Delegate? I would like to express shock and disappointment in the Assembly outcome. Bel did the region a great service, sadly we did not do the same for him. In the event that this matter comes before the cabinet, my stance will absolutely remain the same. Semi-Unretired
I would just like to point something out, and I don't want anyone to be offended, I'm just pointing out some facts.
If the voting period goes by without a hitch, and every position receives a clear winner, we will have less than 25 days before the start of the next election cycle is set to begin. This leaves us with several issues. Either we have to finish the GC by March 15th, which will likely not be possible. We will have to go through another round of elections, and run the GC through that. Or we can suspend elections until after the GC, effectively extending the elected cabinet term. Also, if RON wins in any cabinet position, this will further delay the GC, and cause us to have even less time before the next election cycle because we will have to wait another nine days for the new elections period. These are just the issues I see coming for us to have to address. I would like to now provide my personal opinion on what should be done in the coming days. I urge the citizens of TSP to avoid voting for RON during the voting period, in order to avoid further delay of the Great Council, and more potential toxic campaigning. We have already lost several members during this election period, and I would hate to see what would happen if we had to sit through another. Further, the Great Council has been delayed long enough, and we need to start focusing on actually getting things fixed instead of sitting around talking about fixing things. Additionally, I think we should have granted an extension of the cabinet elected in these elections until the end of the GC, when a new election would be called based on the outcome of it. We will now be faced with the real issue of rushing the GC or passing a motion to grant an extension to the elected cabinet. These are my thoughts on the matter, and I wanted it to be posted here in Tsu and my campaign thread so that everyone knows where I stand. Semi-Unretired
(02-17-2016, 08:12 AM)Drugged Monkeys Wrote: I urge the citizens of TSP to avoid voting for RON during the voting period, in order to avoid further delay of the Great Council, and more potential toxic campaigning. We have already lost several members during this election period, and I would hate to see what would happen if we had to sit through another. I take it, then, you are comfortable having someone on the Cabinet who voted against overturning a security threat designation despite not believing the person to be a security threat, and will not commit to casting a different vote once elected to the Cabinet? That is the practical effect of your suggestion. If Resentine is joined by enough others who will continue to vote against overturning the security threat designation, like Farengeto and Henn, the Cabinet will be unable to overturn the security threat designation and we will have yet more contentious voting on it in the Assembly. There are more ways than elections to lose more members. I've been patient and understanding, and have defended Tsunamy's choice not to use the legal power he has to overturn Belschaft's security threat designation, but if the South Pacific continues to exclude Belschaft from citizenship for the sake of expediency and pacifying a few problem citizens, I'm out of here and I'll be taking my constitutional draft with me. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |