+- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz)
+-- Forum: Hall of Historical Records (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Archives (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-141.html)
+---- Forum: Fudgetopia Hall of Government (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-12.html)
+----- Forum: Assembly of the South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-91.html)
+----- Thread: [FAILED] Security Council Emeriti (/thread-6085.html)
RE: [AT VOTE] Security Council Emeriti - sandaoguo - 04-12-2018
Honestly, here’s the thing. DM is not going to be banjected. We’re not going to waste influence to do that. We’ll never waste influence kicking out a retired high-influence nation. The standard practice is to let them “sit on their influence” so it can be utilized in times of emergency.
So regardless of whether this law passes or not, DM will be treated the way this law would treat him if passed. Because it’s common sense and it’s how the CRS normally does things. Literally all this would do is codify it. Codifying standard practice is a good thing.
RE: [FAILED] Security Council Emeriti - Roavin - 04-15-2018
Now, since this didn't pass, maybe a different way of achieving what Tsu wants.
Original:
Quote:9. The Council on Regional Security will be responsible for establishing an appropriate cap on endorsements, ensuring that such cap is not detrimental to the growth of the region. Enforcement of the endorsement cap should be done with leniency if a violator does not pose a significant risk to regional security.
Suggestion:
Quote:9. The Council on Regional Security will be responsible for establishing and enforcing a policy prescribing how many endorsements a nation may hold. Any caps on endorsements in that policy must balance both regional growth and regional security. Enforcement should be done with leniency if a violator does not pose a significant risk to regional security.
Basically, this rewording mostly means the same thing, but should encourage the CRS to come up with a policy, rather than a single cap, in which nations that have amicably left the CRS or amicably left the Delegacy have a higher allowance than the normal run-of-the-mill nation in our region.
RE: [FAILED] Security Council Emeriti - Roavin - 05-22-2018
@Nakari - would you prefer this to be in a separate thread? If not, I will motion the above.
RE: [FAILED] Security Council Emeriti - Nakari - 05-22-2018
(05-22-2018, 05:37 AM)Roavin Wrote: @Nakari - would you prefer this to be in a separate thread? If not, I will motion the above.
Same thread is fine.
RE: [FAILED] Security Council Emeriti - Roavin - 05-22-2018
Well, then I motion. ^_^