(5) Upon taking office, the Delegate must resign all of their offices and memberships in other regions that are not under The South Pacific's jurisdiction.

Or

(5) Any candidates to the Delegacy must resign all of their offices and memberships in other regions that are not under The South Pacific's jurisdiction.

Thoughts?

Deputy Regional Minister of the Planning and Development Agency(March 8-May 19, 2014)

Local Council Member(April 24-August 11)

Court Justice of TSP(August 15-December 7)

Quotes

"The 1% is like a 1% battery charge. It will die out if it is not charged(the charge is the 99%). But if you don't charge it, it will die for sure, sooner or later"
- Me (2001- Present)

"Change is the world's blood"
- Me (2001-Present)

[Image: 9ehfkQV.png]

(This post was last modified: 07-18-2018, 07:52 AM by Roavin. Edit Reason: Amended title )

Reply

I've been a proponent for a while now of prohibiting all cross-regional office hoarding. So I'll go ahead and throw my support behind this, preferably the first suggestion. If you want to be our Delegate, you shouldn't have any a bunch of conflicting loyalties.

Reply

@Ryccia: Could you remove your Resentine campaign pin? It's a bit weird when your signature is much longer than the post, and it results in some unnecessary scrolling.

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

Reply

@Ryccia: Could you remove your Resentine campaign pin? It's a bit weird when your signature is much longer than the post, and it results in some unnecessary scrolling.

Certainly

Deputy Regional Minister of the Planning and Development Agency(March 8-May 19, 2014)

Local Council Member(April 24-August 11)

Court Justice of TSP(August 15-December 7)

Quotes

"The 1% is like a 1% battery charge. It will die out if it is not charged(the charge is the 99%). But if you don't charge it, it will die for sure, sooner or later"
- Me (2001- Present)

"Change is the world's blood"
- Me (2001-Present)

[Image: 9ehfkQV.png]

Reply

Would this include citizenship in other regions? E.g. I am currently a citizen of TNP, which is helpful for, if not a requirement of, my ambassadorial duties there. Were I to be remaining delegate, would I have had to renounce that citizenship under this amendment?

Sent from my KOB-L09 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

translate

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

Reply

That seems like the logical interpretation of the amendment. If you were to resign your membership at the beginning of your tenure then it would stand to reason that your 'self-imposed imprisonment' should last for the duration of your term.

Reply

While I don't have much issue at all with restricting Delegate from having government positions elsewhere, extending it to citizenship all-together is frankly awful. People should be allowed to still hold membership elsewhere even if they're Delegate, and limiting that seems to seriously be overreaching. To use a personal example, let's not forget some people have posts like Founder positions that they can't exactly resign from. Furthermore, given that Ryccia has chosen to use "membership" and not "citizenship", this could even theoretically apply to residencies elsewhere, which makes it even more awful of a concept.

I'll support restricting the Delegate from having government positions elsewhere, but restricting membership altogether is going way too far. If memberships is removed, and it's clarified to mean political office, rather than potentially referring to apolitical roles like a Founder or an Administrator, I could support it.

[Image: Lj1SunN.png]
Formerly Banned For Still Unspecified "OOC Toxicity"

(This post was last modified: 07-15-2018, 12:33 PM by Tim.)

Reply

While I don't have much issue at all with restricting Delegate from having government positions elsewhere, extending it to citizenship all-together is frankly awful. People should be allowed to still hold membership elsewhere even if they're Delegate, and limiting that seems to seriously be overreaching. To use a personal example, let's not forget some people have posts like Founder positions that they can't exactly resign from. Furthermore, given that Ryccia has chosen to use "membership" and not "citizenship", this could even theoretically apply to residencies elsewhere, which makes it even more awful of a concept.

I'll support restricting the Delegate from having government positions elsewhere, but restricting membership altogether is going way too far. If memberships is removed, and it's clarified to mean political office, rather than potentially referring to apolitical roles like a Founder or an Administrator, I could support it.

There are genuine conflicts of interests when somebody is Delegate here and doing God knows what throughout NationStates. The Delegate represents TSP, and all of their actions reflects upon the region and the office. Should the Delegate of TSP really be, for example, influencing TEP's foreign relations? How many hats can one person wear, before we start questioning loyalties or priorities? It's hard to know if somebody is advocating a foreign treaty based on TSP's interests or the other region they're involved in. But we should expect the Delegate of TSP to act always for the benefit of TSP. How much is that possible when they're spread across the game, acting on behalf of many different regions and organizations?

Reply

There are genuine conflicts of interests when somebody is Delegate here and doing God knows what throughout NationStates. The Delegate represents TSP, and all of their actions reflects upon the region and the office. Should the Delegate of TSP really be, for example, influencing TEP's foreign relations? How many hats can one person wear, before we start questioning loyalties or priorities? It's hard to know if somebody is advocating a foreign treaty based on TSP's interests or the other region they're involved in. But we should expect the Delegate of TSP to act always for the benefit of TSP. How much is that possible when they're spread across the game, acting on behalf of many different regions and organizations?

There's totally potential conflicts of interests. Voters should stay well-informed on that, and keep elected officials accountable. I'm not sure why we need an overreaching law on that, which will not only limit against the say 5% or so that could be taken issue with, but against the 95% or so that's literally just also hanging out elsewhere.

I would sure as hell hope that anybody elected Delegate would cut down on their activities elsewhere, especially politically-involved ones, and I sure as hell hope voters and citizens would actual speak up about it during campaigns or during terms if they saw issue with something. However, simply having basic citizenship, residency, or an apolitical position somewhere is not causing harm to anyone. This is a prime example of overlegislation, one that will do far more harm than good, and seems to be more driven by reactionary thoughts and personal biases than attentiveness to the actual impact this could have.

Yes, we should expect the Delegate of TSP to be acting in TSP's interests, but I think that this is something much more easily solved by setting expectations - which basically already exist - than pushing through a kneejerk amendment which will cause far more harm and headache than is worth.

[Image: Lj1SunN.png]
Formerly Banned For Still Unspecified "OOC Toxicity"

(This post was last modified: 07-15-2018, 01:59 PM by Tim.)

Reply

A TSP Delegate, in my view, should only be involved in TSP only. Nowhere else should they be involved, they must only be TSPers in their tenure. This reduces the chance for foreign interfierence to doom our Coalition, our beloved region, our TSP.

Our system is good and stable, but it can always be improved. For our region, for our posterity, we must not leave any doors open, and no keys unguarded. A security system may be working fine, but if there is a chance for improvement so scoundrels may not get in, we should incur in that cost.

An exception for apolitical Founders could be entertainted, and it is certainly a good idea, as that position is not so easily given away. But Delegates should be TSPers, and only TSPers. They should not be anything else, and they shouldn't be anywhere else. Due to the dangerous power the position is embowed by NS mechanics themselves, we should reduce any foreign involvement as much as possible. Only TSP, and only TSP, no other region should be remotely involved with the Delegacy. That includes the office holder proper.

Deputy Regional Minister of the Planning and Development Agency(March 8-May 19, 2014)

Local Council Member(April 24-August 11)

Court Justice of TSP(August 15-December 7)

Quotes

"The 1% is like a 1% battery charge. It will die out if it is not charged(the charge is the 99%). But if you don't charge it, it will die for sure, sooner or later"
- Me (2001- Present)

"Change is the world's blood"
- Me (2001-Present)

[Image: 9ehfkQV.png]

Reply