I think Kris never specified the methods used. Don't think it was a trick question.

Will give my thoughts on the main topic tonight, but I think this system proposed by Tsu has merits from an initial read.

I think that before agreeing on anything we should run a few non-binding test polls to see what results we get.

A fundamental of democracy is that the votes are cast fairly and on that basis I can understand people's concerns over potential use of puppets to sway a vote. However, given Kris's reassurance that for the upper chamber the citizen approval process is robust and that the upper chamber retains the veto on legislation, I really believe this presents TSP with a great opportunity to trial a step forward in democracy for the wider region.

That's not to say there won't be problems and that from time to time there may be tensions between the lower chamber and the upper chamber given their different memberships (in a sort of house of residents v house of citizens way) or that polls in the lower house may from time to time be influenced by puppets (not unlike the effects of lobbying and pressure groups or party whips in the real world) but we have the veto system for the later.

It will be challenging but I think it also could be an exciting development for the growth of the region. Let us embrace a more inclusive future.

I'll shut up now.  

(01-12-2015, 06:41 PM)Darkstrait Wrote: So, basically, the main reason for not doing this is because people clearly already have access to the forums and can vote and discuss at will? Personally, I think that just sounds dumb. I've been a member of TSP for 41 days exactly: I still have Tsu's welcome telegram. But I didn't do a single thing in regional politics until a few days ago. Now, I tried to be politically active; I joined the WA. But that was not the same. The only way for people to get more than a taste of regional politics is to join the forums at this point. I'm ready to see that change.

No. There are numerous security concerns. There is a legitimate debate to be had about why we should marry two communities of TSP when their interests don't overlap that much. There's a debate to be had about whether "because polls exist" is a good enough reason to change our system so drastically.

@Hopolis: I've been in this region for a long time, so I feel I have an authoritative idea of what this region would do. Somebody will game the on site polls. Those on site polls will be overriding, regardless of Assembly veto power. People will call them the will of the region, and arguing against the result will be cast as anti-democratic oppression of the masses in the region. The idea that a veto power will be a saving grace against the gaming of the system is -- and I don't mean to sound like an ass -- but it's naive.

(01-12-2015, 09:38 PM)Sopo Wrote: The security concerns absolutely need to be addressed. I am not comfortable with this at all. As QD said, it would be incredibly easy to march in a mass of puppets and swing the votes.

I concur with GR.

You'd have to keep it as a WA nations only and discount votes if they come from someone who joined TSP after the vote began. Fairly easy to do. 

Keeping it WA-only nations kind of defeats the narrative that you shouldn't have to jump through hoops to have power in the legislature.

I do not agree with this at all, I have and always been a supporter of an extremely lax citizenship policy, because I believe in TSP if you want to get involved, you should be able to get involved.

But that doesn't mean giving a huge amount of political power to a group of votes who are literally unable to have an organized debate on the topic at hand. Who might not even know the effect of their vote or think they are involved in roleplay, and under this system both are incredibly real risks.

Democracy is a two way street, and it is one where we as citizens gain the right to vote, in return for agreeing with the charter. Any system where we give the power to vote to someone who doesn't have to (theoretically) read and agree to the laws of the land, is one that I can not support.

(01-12-2015, 10:28 PM)Sandaoguo Wrote: Keeping it WA-only nations kind of defeats the narrative that you shouldn't have to jump through hoops to have power in the legislature.

The WA is widely accessible to players. It's right there. It's on the site. It's in the site's FAQ. It's the first thing you join in the game. You do it fifteen minutes into playing NS.

The forum on the other hand is off-site -- it's its own little niche carved out bureaucratically which players simply don't know enough about to participate. We tell them to participate, but we don't enable them to participate in an accessible, pro-active manner to them. 

The worst part of this is there a gap in terms of participation and the people on the other side - us- are arrogant enough to subscribe our participation to our character and their lack of participation to their character, instead of resolving to reduce the participation gap that respects them as individuals and equal members of The South Pacific. 

The WA is far more exclusive than the forum. Right off the bat, you're excluding anyone who is a member of the SPSF or another military and anyone whose WA is elsewhere (like WADs of other regions). I won't be able to move my WA to vote since any votes after the poll was started will be discounted.

Anyone with a nation in the region can join the forum and vote. It is inclusive and secure.

(01-12-2015, 10:56 PM)Unibot Wrote:

(01-12-2015, 10:28 PM)Sandaoguo Wrote: Keeping it WA-only nations kind of defeats the narrative that you shouldn't have to jump through hoops to have power in the legislature.

The WA is widely accessible to players. It's right there. It's on the site. It's in the site's FAQ. It's the first thing you join in the game. You do it fifteen minutes into playing NS.

I agree here.

And, we can certainly make it "Native, World Assembly members." That would mean it would be only people who are part of the WA (so only one nation in the entire game) and people who have more influence in TSP and any other region (thereby making sure people aren't moving in just to vote).

That should take care of our security issues, no?