Users browsing this thread:

**Seraph** · 10-31-2017, 05:21 AM

The following is a rough draft I have produced of some legislation to allow us to better prepare for and act during next year's Z-Day. It is something I thought about last year and, with so many ROs availability being poor this year, it has been highlighted to me as an area which could be improved. The act below is not intended to be definitive, but merely the start of a conversation as I'm sure there is much to be refined and more that could be added to ensure the event went as smoothly as possible and that the proposed position had the powers and the remit it required.

Draft Z-Day Act Wrote:
The Z-Day Act
A legal framework for an important annual event.

I. Regional Z-Day Coordinator

1) The Cabinet will appoint a Regional Z-Day Coordinator (RZC) to plan and oversee the regional response to the annual Z-Day event.

2) The RZC will be granted Regional Officer powers over communication, appearance and border control and will work with the cabinet and, in particular, the Ministry of Regional Affairs to ensure a consistent, attention-grabbing promotional campaign before the event and ensure that the event is well-run and coordinated throughout its course.

3) Those wishing to be considered for appointment must be available during the event itself and willing to put a considerable amount of time and effort into the planning and operational control of the event.

4) The RZC will be able to appoint subordinates to aid them in their task, but will not be permitted to add to the roster of Regional Officers.

5) Starting on the 15th September and lasting until 20th September, residents of the South Pacific may submit a campaign on the regional forums or via dispatch shared on the Regional Message Board to be considered for the role of Regional Z-Day Coordinator. During this period residents may question and debate with applicants to help the cabinet in their decision-making.

6) Once the campaigning period has ended, the Cabinet will have until 30th September to make and announce their appointment, after which the new RZC will be granted their Regional Officer powers.

II. Border Control

1) The RZC and other ROs with border control powers will be permitted to:
a) close the borders for the duration of the event;
b) eject (but not ban) any nations deemed to be a threat to the regional plan.

2) Nations ejected during the Z-Day event will have no right to appeal whilst the event is still in progress. Once the event ends and the border is re-opened they will not be denied reentry.

Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond!

Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi.

Salma 145:8

translate

(This post was last modified: 12-20-2017, 08:58 PM by Nakari.)

**Farengeto** · 10-31-2017, 12:10 PM

While I get its intent there are a number of fundamental issues:

I'm not sure why we need a formalized position at all. Historically it's been at MoRA discretion and I see no purpose in formalizing a role for one day a year.
The Delegate and Cabinet can already give out appearance and communication powers, so defining it is unnecessary (and in the wrong law). I strongly object to handing out the Border Control power both for obvious security issues and for further reasons I will get into later. We already don't give it to anyone outside the CRS.
I don't get the point of the campaigns, especially since it would be a cabinet-appointed position. Even more so when they're being asked to do it a month early; elections for the new MoRA won't even start by then. Even if they were in October the overlapping schedule with Cabinet and LC elections will only cause confusion.
As well I'm concerned about these ejections. While they can be treated as harmless they can easily be misused. Especially now that Z-Day can flip nations how can we say who is going against the plan? Drall was embracing, who is to say I can't eject this LC member? Suppose I see someone high endo who becomes (voluntarily or forcefully) an embracer, what stops me from kicking them out to remove their endos without invoking the BCA? Our Delegate has been embracing for a while, can I eject him right before update?

**Seraph** · 10-31-2017, 01:59 PM

Well, I did say it was the start of a conversation, not a definitive draft (not least because I don't currently have time to work on such a draft), but I'll give my thoughts on each of the points raised and why I think they warrant further thought (rather than a specific defence of the wording above).

1) I like to think I've been a pretty good MoRA - I've been a pretty successful MoRA during at least my first term last year, despite a not-briliant Z-Day. Being generally good at regional affairs does not in any way mean that I'll be good at the particular kind of organisation and coordination required to run Z day. Basically, I've proven that two years in a row, although this year the issue had a lot more to do with my availability (which I flagged up as early as my campaign) than anything else.

I first started thinking about an elected or appointed temporary role after last year's debacle because, I realised, the person in charge of the Ministry is not, in any way, necessarily the best person to run Z day and the proximity to the start of a new term only compounds the issue. But Z-Day is important. It's an annual event that a lot of nations that might not be involved otherwise set a lot of store by and if we don't put in a good showing it reflects poorly on the entire region and the government that runs it. If Z-Day is well organised and runs smoothly, whether or not we're all that successful, it helps to encourage more casual players to become involved and gives confidence in the skills of the government. We want to get this right and the best way to do so is to have someone with the talent and desire to do it well specifically given the role with enough time to prepare it properly. None of those requirements is met in me (nor is there any reason they would in any future October MoRA), or in the time allowed from the start of the October term.

2) It is an important power for use during Z-Day, but the law could easily state that the RZC (or whomever) must request border control help from the CRS, or so on.

3) The point of the campaigns is to provide something more in-depth than an application form and to allow the region a degree of oversight into the procedure, as well as alllowing a public inquiry into the merits of each campaign. The reason it is then a cabinet appointment is that the event should be run by the winner of a potentially political popularity contest, but someone who is definitely going to get the job done.

4) Those are all good reasons for further exploring the language and working out what restrictions we want on such a legal power, rather than for eradicating it altogether. We've had people eject nations during Z day before with varying degrees of outcry. It would be good to define the legality or illegality of such. I'm personally in favour of a moderate policy where it is allowed but not encouraged, so long as the effects are not lasting and the region is made clear about the possibility beforehand, but clearly, any such action, even during a short-term event, should have clear rules within our laws.

Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond!

Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi.

Salma 145:8

translate

**Belschaft** · 10-31-2017, 03:39 PM

I am completely opposed to this; Z-Day is a mini-game, and people should be free to play it without the regional government jumping on them for not doing what they are told. The idea that someone could be ejected from TSP for embracing zombies - something, which in the interest of disclosure, I tend to do if I have the time to play Z-Day - runs entirely against our culture, laws and traditions. It's also almost certainly a breach of the Rights and Freedoms clause of the charter; next are we going to start ejecting people if they don't obey a MoRA instruction to use the Llama as their national animal?

This is complete overreach.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

Drall · 10-31-2017, 10:38 PM

I embraced zombies early on this time. The fact that I could be ejected for picking a certain choice in a minigame is utter bullshit. Ejections should be taken seriously, not thrown about when people go against the majority in an inconsequential minigame. This absurdity of this is magnified by the fact the the event lasts over 24 hours, which means that endorsements and all could actually be lost. In the case of high influence nations, ejection can hurt the ROs, actually weakening the security of the region. In addition to these obvious absurdities, this is in clear breach of the Rights of every Citizen.

I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of letting people campaign for a Director style position, but I don't think that needs legislation, and it certainly shouldn't be as formalized of a process as this is suggesting.

All in all, I'm of the opinion that this would be better left to the discretion of the MoRA, and not micromanaged in this fashion.

Marius Rahl

Fortitudine Vincimus!

Sam111 · 10-31-2017, 11:14 PM

I think we should be allowed to eject low influence nations, ones that aren't really citizens and that have just been created/moved in to thwart our plans.

Hello

**Farengeto** · 11-01-2017, 09:08 AM

(10-31-2017, 11:14 PM)Sam111 Wrote: I think we should be allowed to eject low influence nations, ones that aren't really citizens and that have just been created/moved in to thwart our plans.

We're a GCR though. Do we really want to start ejecting new people witjput warning because they made the wrong choice in a pme day minigame?

***Tsunamy*** · 11-01-2017, 10:31 AM

This is a technical questions, but if we eject someone during Z-Day, does that mess with influence and the like? Or, is it just for the day?

I mean — I hate Z Day and think the entire thing is a nuance. But, if things like ejections would be fixed *after* the when the game resets, I don't think it would be an issue to use them for the day?

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

***Kris Kringle*** · 11-01-2017, 10:41 AM

Population is the only stat that is reset after Z-Day, to my knowledge. Ejections would stand.

Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

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

***Roavin*** · 11-01-2017, 11:05 AM

(11-01-2017, 10:41 AM)Kris Kringle Wrote: Ejections would stand.

Can confirm. And if the nation is ejected through a game update (happens roughly every 12 hours), they will lose their endorsements and get decayed influence as well. Not a problem for, say, my nation, but surely a problem for, say, PS2 or Belschaft or BCP or especially a CRS member.