1) How do you feel about regional involvement in the election so far?
2) Do you believe the Cabinet should go back to using formal statements as the primary means we communicate in the NSGP forums?
3) If a minister disagreed got elected on a platform different than the agenda you are proposing the prime minister set (or simply disagrees) for the agenda you set out.  If it came down to it, who's view should have supremacy?

The 16th Delegate of The South Pacific

Reply

What is your view on the IJCC? What do you think TSP should do or not do in response?

What would you do if a Minister in your Cabinet is not cooperative?

The Prime Minister must be someone capable of understanding the issues in RA, MA, and FA. Can you briefly explain why you have the requisite background and/or knowledge to understand any issues in each of these ministries?

What is toxicity? What kind of things in the day-to-day of TSP would you consider toxic? How is it something that the Prime Minister can address?

I do not believe we need to concern ourselves too much with the IJCC. The regions involved are those who were already hostile to TSP, and some major figures involved have shown nothing but hostility to us since at least the Hileville coup. Diplomacy with those involved would prove futile despite any efforts as some, especially the leadership of Balder, would love nothing more than to see violent regime change in our region. Despite this, I do not believe they pose any sort of military or political threat to TSP. Despite our instabilities we remain a strong region which has put aside the ideological conflict tore us apart in years past, and after struggling for years the SPSF continues to be a powerful force for our region. We stand strong and no longer divided by ideological conflict, while this organization has yet to prove it won't just fall into activity like many before have.

Ideally, the first step will be resolving these matters will be attempting an internal cabinet resolution to these problems. Should any attempt at resolving this respectfully fail, I believe it will be necessary to involve the greater region, even just as simply as raising it privately in the assembly rather than something as drastic as a recall.. The idea of always presenting Cabinet unity is somewhat overrated, especially with our system of electing individual ministers. Hiding these conflicts only feeds the resentment that fuels later conflicts, and just hides the dysfunction rather than taking steps to address it. 

I have a bit of experience in all three ministries, though I make no claims at being an expert at any of them. I served briefly as MoRA a few years ago, however most of my real work with the ministry came later. I'd worked as part of the ministry for a while, and engaged in a variety of RA projects over my time there. I would consider MoRA to be my strongest ministry, with my firsthand experience and involvement with many elements of it. I'd also served as MoFA in the aftermath of the Hileville coup and helped hold things together during the transition period, in addition to doing a couple minor ambassador roles in the past. While I don't consider myself a particularly good MoFA, it gave me a lot of firsthand insights to the way the ministry works and what it demands. As for MA I did serve as part of the military back a few years ago and was a fairly active updater as a member for a few terms, even being nominated as an early general. Unfortunately, my military career came to an end when I chose to join the Committee for State Security (as the CRS was called back then) and I have been unable to participate since. This was at a time far from the currently glory of the SPSF, but the months that I was active there taught me a lot about NS militaries.

I'm not sure we can make an overarching definition of toxicity. There's a lot of behaviours that can be considered toxicity that happen within TSP; Shutting down of criticism, personal attacks, there's a variety of these behaviours that occur that just make TSP a less enjoyable place to be in. This can go as far as chasing users away from TSP (which has happened before) to just discouraging people from playing (something which I've had happen multiple times), and when it gets to the scale of the community the toxicity affects even those not involved. As a region these have been called part of TSP before, but that is wrong and part of the problem. The first step of addressing the toxicity issue is a self-awareness of the problem, which is why I have run on a campaign that emphasizes the fact that this is an issue. As Prime Minister I will also be more able to work with all the branches of TSP to work on crafting a regional solution, even if I'm only able to begin the first steps of addressing the problem during my term.
 

HI FARENGETO! WHAT ARE YOUR PLANS RELATING TO THE JOINT GOOD OF GAME-SIDE, FORUM AND DISCORD COMMUNITIES?

I outlined a few of my major focuses in my response to Beepee's question. I don't feel I can appropriately answer your question without asking you be a bit more specific.
 

1) How do you feel about regional involvement in the election so far?
2) Do you believe the Cabinet should go back to using formal statements as the primary means we communicate in the NSGP forums?
3) If a minister disagreed got elected on a platform different than the agenda you are proposing the prime minister set (or simply disagrees) for the agenda you set out.  If it came down to it, who's view should have supremacy?

I feel engagement has been lower than I would have liked, only a small handful of users have asked any questions and I've been hoping to see more posts overall in the campaigns. It's not the first time this has been an issue, and for a long time we had problems even having competitive races for all Cabinet positions.

I don't believe we need to make everything we say formal statements, but we do need to fix how we are responding. Some recent ministers make posts on NSGP that are entirely inappropriate. When we do make a proper public statement I believe it should be formal, as it reflects better both on the Cabinet and the region as a whole. But I think in general the important subject is just using appropriate language for a diplomatic setting.

I don't believe one or the other should have supremacy in that matter, as that is a matter that fuels anger and resentment within the Cabinet. The appropriate response is discussion and creating a compromise that works for both. Absolute supremacy will end up benefiting no one in the long run.

Reply

If you could highlight one aspect of your campaign to convince me to vote for you, what would it be?

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

The LORD is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love.
Psalm 145: 8

Reply

If you could highlight one aspect of your campaign to convince me to vote for you, what would it be?

I would have to say either my agenda on communication or toxicity.

The communications element has been a core element of this campaign, and my previous PM campaigns. It's a subject which I have a long and consistent record on, as I have been running on addressing since before we elected the first Prime Minister. Yet despite the time that has passed it remains a constant issue.

On the other hand, the problems of toxicity have been around for longer than I have, and have likewise been a constant problem. Despite this, it's constantly ignored or dismissed. I am the only current whose campaign even acknowledges it as an issue. It's not a simple problem, nor one I expect to fix in a single term, but it's something that negatively affects the stability and health of our community.

Reply

I'm not sure we can make an overarching definition of toxicity. There's a lot of behaviours that can be considered toxicity that happen within TSP; Shutting down of criticism, personal attacks, there's a variety of these behaviours that occur that just make TSP a less enjoyable place to be in. This can go as far as chasing users away from TSP (which has happened before) to just discouraging people from playing (something which I've had happen multiple times), and when it gets to the scale of the community the toxicity affects even those not involved.

This may sound ignorant, but I'm honestly not seeing it, or at least not at a scale where I'd consider it a systemic problem. Can you give some examples?

Reply

Clearly, there become a lot of disharmony in the current Cabinet. Could you share your take on the "Motion of No Confidence" and what you would do differently to ensure a better working relationship?

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

Reply