| Citizenship |
|
Part of the reason for moving to a "legislator" system is that people in region have complained about having to apply for citizenship in the past. Changing the terminology solves that.
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)
And allowing automatic citizenship allows for vote stacking and abuse. I could see letting them in to the Assembly area with read only permissions upon registration, but only getting the permissions to reply and vote after they apply and are vetted.
Which is exactly why the proposal is to transfer the political rights of citizenship to a new masking/designation.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator
(04-04-2016, 08:04 PM)Belschaft Wrote: Part of the reason for moving to a "legislator" system is that people in region have complained about having to apply for citizenship in the past. Changing the terminology solves that. I diddnt have any major problems with the citizenship process, just that it was messy and it took me over a week to get masked. (though I have been informed of the reason of my masking was delayed). My fill in the blank application would be easier as there would be a "hand holding" effect that new people want to figure out how things work. With voting to continue citizenship as mentioned above, I can agree to this, as long as the people who don't want to be in the voting and debate process for law making be allowed to follow the current provisions of two post a month rule on a designated forum. -Griffindor/Ebonhand
-Current Roles/Positions -Legislator 2/24/20- -High Court Justice 6/7/20- -South Pacific Coral Guard 11/17/20- -Minister of Engagement 6/17/22- -Past Roles/Positions -Legislator 7/3/16-4/10/18 -Secretary of State 4/3/20-2/24/21 -Chair of the APC 9/24/16-5/31/17 -Vice-Chair of the APC 6/1/17-4/10/18 -Local Council Member 7/1/17-11/17/17 -Citizen 5/2012-12/2014 and 2/26/16-7/3/2016 (04-03-2016, 05:13 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: I would not be opposed to letting the Chair basically tell them to eff-off, though. TSPers tend to dislike it when you can't provide an objective way to review things like that, though. I'm sorry I just saw this, but there have been a number of occasions where I was literally raging at my desk reading Assembly posts. A method of review would be probably to keep a publicly viewable log of disciplinary actions taken by a Chair and probably allowing a dispute process in the Courts or something along the lines of basically 'give me a good reason why I should not keep you out of the Assembly' (04-04-2016, 12:51 PM)Belschaft Wrote: What about a simple review period for applications for Legislator status? So it can't be gained immediately, but only X days after application? We could also give the Chair the power to reject an application, subject to appeal/approval of the assembly. I'd be slightly okay with this, if you guys are as well. For some reason or another, I tend to not trust myself too much 
|
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
PREVIOUS ROLES 
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |