| PASSED: Regional Communications Act |
|
Here's an idea along the pushing legislative agendas idea:
Pushing a legislative agenda- which shall be defined as any act that may sway someone to vote a certain way in a binding poll or vote. 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
(08-15-2016, 09:45 AM)Belschaft Wrote: I'm absolutely not proposing that anyone create a frenzy. I am simply arguing that the political representatives of regional WA members should not be prevented from communicating with said regional WA members on political matters. Good. As I said, I'm looking to avoid the former — as I'm sure w all are. However, I do see potential to get from the "communicating ... political matters" to creating a frenzy. Especially if someone is suggesting legislation and then creating a massive campaign about it, it could certainly upset upset the entire region if handled incorrectly. In regard to my proposal, if you wrote the legislation, wouldn't Punch and/or Erinor be able to do the polling and mass TGing for it? Or heck, even the MoRA, the CoA or the Delegate could pass along the information, no? On a similar note, though, who exactly is the LC advocating to? I'm not sure the advocating needs to be done toward the gameside region, per se. It's done on behalf of and for, but not necessarily to. So, since the legislation is really looking at communication to the gameside, not about the gameside, we should be able to split the representing and advocating functions.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
This debate is so insanely funny.
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
You simply shouldn't be making any recommendations at all. It's really not a hard concept. Mentioning that it will increase the percentage is perfectly fine, since that is pure fact, but a recommendation is not okay. I honestly can't believe that a debate on such a simple topic could be this hard to sort out.
(08-15-2016, 04:38 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: This debate is so insanely funny. Maybe I should actually read Assmebly threads if they're funny.
I am Zadiner/Zak. Part of Assembly, some other stuff, Founder of some other region.
Hey, I have a bunch of issues. You don't need to care. Emoji of the week: :dodgy:
It's funny because it's so ridiculous.
Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator. I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum. Legal Resources: THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System
Guys we need to get draft language here and vote on something. If we don't this is never going to happen.
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
Why is the LC even using the Mass Telegrams? I mean, I know why it's b being done right now, but it was not intended to be used this way.
The Charter language on the LC Communications, in my opinion, is written with the intention to avoid the use of Mass TG's, and instead for them to use Dispatches and the RMB to promote activity and discussion. Here are the issues I have with Telegrams: 1. First, and most obvious, is the potential for abuse to use them to push one's own agenda. Providing biased or one-sided information, or even directly stating which way people should vote. 2. This is essentially a one-way form of communication. Yes, individuals can respond one on one to the sender, but it eliminates group discussion on the game side level. 3. It is slightly bothersome to the region to constantly receive Mass TG's. We need to remember that the Regional Community does want to have input in the Offsite Government, but that not EVERY person in TSP wants that. We are forcing it on people who may not want it. This, I believe, is why the Charter may attempt to limit the use of Mass TG's by requiring the Delegates approval, while Dispatches are fair game without approval. The LC should be using dispatches, and the RMB, to promote discussion and activity among the game side. This will also eliminate pushing this stuff on people who may not want any part of it. Semi-Unretired
(08-17-2016, 01:09 PM)Drugged Monkeys Wrote: Why is the LC even using the Mass Telegrams? I mean, I know why it's b being done right now, but it was not intended to be used this way. If this is the case I say we approve this act and amend the charter to reflect that. 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 |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |