| [DRAFT] Gameside Act |
Dear Legislators,
This may garner a lot of negative reactions, but I believe that a law making it so government officials (Including the CRS!) need to be active gameside. There is a ton of government members never posting on the RMB, or really doing anything at all. This should change that. Gameside Act
An act to increase gameside presence by government officials Definitions
1. A Government Official is a nation who has any powers in TSP, including the Delegate. This includes the Cabinet, Local Council, Council on Regional Security, and the Delegacy. 2. Gameside Activity is defined as RMB posts, factbooks, or dispatches. Factbooks and Dispatches have to be at least 2 paragraphs long. Basically, anything that can be seen by various members of the public. I. Imposing Rules for Gameside Activity by Government Officials
II. Consequences for Government Officials
III. Exceptions
Midwesterner. Political nerd. Chipotle enthusiast.
Minister of Culture of the South Pacific // Former Prime Minister
This ... is interesting.
And possibly something I could support.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
I pity the poor soul who would be charged with keeping track of activity.
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
Interesting concept, but like Kris has said it'd be hard for whomever has to keep tabs on this.
It's casual- Sharikan
The Gameplayer also known as Kangly/Kang/Kangles
I mean, our national happenings list everything we do, so it wouldn't be *that* hard.
We just might be a more realistic schedule to check activity.
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
This is a fair point, but I think that there's some issues I have here.
For one, I think 10 days is a little lax, quite frankly. However I also think that there's such a vagueness with the description of "activity" Secondary question to piggyback further off of Kris, what's the plan for the person to be watching this? Who would it be? Who would appoint this person?
It's casual- Sharikan
The Gameplayer also known as Kangly/Kang/Kangles
I think this is a really interesting conversation to be having, so I'm glad North Prarie had brought it up with this draft. I also think that a lot needs to be worked out as to how desirable this is, how to measure it and enforce it, who will police it, what kind of activity do we believe that our government officials should be producing, etc.?
I don't have any answers to those questions right now, but I'm pleased we are talking about it. Sent from my SM-J320FN using Tapatalk 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
Interesting idea. Here are some thoughts!
We require frequent checks of the forum for legislators, so I guess it makes sense to require frequent checks of gameside. (The difference is that the legislator forum checks aren't for community engagement.) However, you're probably going to get a lot of government officials posting two paragraphs of nothing every week, or posting something meaningless on the RMB  It'll be the equivalent of government officials voting Abstain in every vote. Technically it will count but I'm not sure that's what you're aiming for.Sure, you can start requiring a higher level of interaction, but that edges towards forcing people to take part in something they don't want to in order to run for a position they want. In my opinion it's possible to be part of the TSP community without interacting with that part of it, but I don't know, maybe people should be forced to do that if they want to be an official of TSP. Perhaps my opinion is colored by the fact that talking on the RMB feels so awkward - it's everything together, so I tend to feel like I'm butting in, and I've never really used the RMB as a channel of communication - so I'd totally be someone who only posts dispatches.
I could support something like this, after some slight revisions, and making the language more formal.
Also, why is this in the private area? -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
I very much do not support this. First, it’s a violation of the federalism principles in the Charter— the forum and the game side are two equal communities, with their own responsible governing bodies. Why should we be requiring Cabinet officials to post on the RMB? Shall we require LC members to become legislators and post on the forums?
Second, we had posting requirements here for a long time. We got rid of them because people would literally just post “I posted this month” in a thread to meet those requirements. You’re not going to get forum players to become active on the RMB. You’re going to get us to grudgingly post meaningless spam every 10 days. *We are separate communities with different interests.* Not all of us like the kind of talk that happens on the RMB, just as not all RMBers like or care about what we do in the forums. That’s acceptable and we should just live with that— especially those of us who have been here for years and know better. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
translate
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |