Users browsing this thread:

***Tsunamy*** · 05-11-2016, 07:26 PM

(05-11-2016, 05:07 PM)sandaoguo Wrote:
(05-11-2016, 05:02 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: Do we need an LC observer? I think we need the ability for non-legislators to be involved in the CRS. Not just observers.

I expressed my objections to that, because it's very important that members of the CRS value the legitimacy of the forum government. That's not likely to be the case when they've never even joined the forums. I believe your response was that, if that's the worry, then non-legislators can be added without voting power. Your idea was to allow players who served for 2 or so terms in the LC to be considered, and possibly with a special status.

But ... that's markedly different than an observer. I don't care whether or not they are privy to the discussions, I want them to have the ability to keep raising endos in-game.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

***sandaoguo*** · 05-11-2016, 07:31 PM

If that's all you want, wouldn't the CRS simply be able to allow that through the endo cap? The requirements for CRS membership don't have anything to do with the endocap. That's set separately by the CRS, and it's as flexible as it is now. So they could really institute anything they want, like a multi-tiered cap, or have exemptions for long-time natives, etc.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

***sandaoguo*** · 05-11-2016, 07:35 PM

For instance, in TNP, the endo cap is as high as 75% of the Delegate's endos. But the requirements for TNPSC membership is only 50%.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

***Tsunamy*** · 05-11-2016, 07:37 PM

(05-11-2016, 07:31 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: If that's all you want, wouldn't the CRS simply be able to allow that through the endo cap? The requirements for CRS membership don't have anything to do with the endocap. That's set separately by the CRS, and it's as flexible as it is now. So they could really institute anything they want, like a multi-tiered cap, or have exemptions for long-time natives, etc.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. *That's* what I want. I want to make sure the offsite isn't going to engage in a protracted debate with someone like Curly or TSSS (or B&N for that matter) over their endorsement number. If that's something we can handle through the CRS — great. If that's something that needs to be legislated, then I'd like that we do that.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

**Farengeto** · 05-11-2016, 07:40 PM

(05-11-2016, 07:37 PM)Tsunamy Wrote:
(05-11-2016, 07:31 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: If that's all you want, wouldn't the CRS simply be able to allow that through the endo cap? The requirements for CRS membership don't have anything to do with the endocap. That's set separately by the CRS, and it's as flexible as it is now. So they could really institute anything they want, like a multi-tiered cap, or have exemptions for long-time natives, etc.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. *That's* what I want. I want to make sure the offsite isn't going to engage in a protracted debate with someone like Curly or TSSS (or B&N for that plemty omatter) over their endorsement number. If that's something we can handle through the CRS — great. If that's something that needs to be legislated, then I'd like that we do that.

Under the current draft the threshold to apply for CRS is around 150, and wil l be at most 200. The cap can still be anything we want, just obviously it should be at minimum that threshold plus a bit (which our new cap of 180 leaves plenty of room for).

***Tsunamy*** · 05-11-2016, 07:44 PM

(05-11-2016, 07:40 PM)Farengeto Wrote:
(05-11-2016, 07:37 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: Yes. *That's* what I want. I want to make sure the offsite isn't going to engage in a protracted debate with someone like Curly or TSSS (or B&N for that plemty omatter) over their endorsement number. If that's something we can handle through the CRS — great. If that's something that needs to be legislated, then I'd like that we do that.

Under the current draft the threshold to apply for CRS is around 150, and wil l be at most 200. The cap can still be anything we want, just obviously it should be at minimum that threshold plus a bit (which our new cap of 180 leaves plenty of room for).

But ... if we hit 150 and don't apply, are you going to be stopped? I think that's my questions. Under the current guidelines, someone like Curly can't apply to be a CRS member. Can he continue with endorsements?

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

***sandaoguo*** · 05-11-2016, 07:59 PM

Yeah, he would be able to, so long as the CRS chose to allow him. The Charter says the endocap should be enforced leniently, as well. We don't want to basically be ejecting people left and right once they hit the cap.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Awe · 05-11-2016, 10:08 PM

(05-11-2016, 03:21 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: - Changing the CR to match Awe's election schedule

Actually I think the Continuing Resolution looks good as it is, unless I'm missing something that needs to be changed.

[Image: 9ehfkQV.png]

the island league

Former Offices

RP Information

Railana · 05-12-2016, 09:01 AM

(04-30-2016, 11:42 AM)sandaoguo Wrote: @Railana: Do you think we need to codify WA affairs? Currently it's under the purview of whichever Cabinet members wants it.

I think we should, yes. Looking at the proposed Charter, it's not really clear right now under which Cabinet member the portfolio would fall.

Frankly, given that the World Assembly is a major component of the game, I think we should follow in the footsteps of our fellow feeders (e.g. TNP) and have a separate ministerial position for it. The description in the Charter could look something like the following:

Minister of World Assembly Affairs

1. The Minister of World Assembly Affairs will be responsible for promoting regional involvement in the World Assembly, preparing advisory opinions and conducting polls of residents on resolutions at vote, and providing proposal drafting assistance, especially guiding the development of proposals collaboratively drafted by residents.

2. The Minister of World Assembly Affairs will coordinate with the Ministers of Foreign and Military Affairs to represent regional interests in the Security Council.

(This post was last modified: 05-12-2016, 12:00 PM by Railana.)

***sandaoguo*** · 05-12-2016, 12:17 PM

I really don't like the idea of introducing some kind of rigid Cabinet office for the WA. We should be flexible with how we use our influence, and that includes changing how we handle Delegate votes from time to time.

I would prefer we debate this after the GC. It's an area that the region hasn't considered deeply, because it's a relatively niche area that few have been interested in. It'd be better to discuss how to handle the WA when we aren't limited by time, trying to wrap the GC up.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk