Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform - Printable Version +- 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: Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform (/thread-9667.html) |
|
Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform - Witchcraft and Sorcery - 08-22-2021
RE: Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform - Witchcraft and Sorcery - 08-22-2021 Please read the Cabinet thread here, now declassified: https://tspforums.xyz/thread-9542.html RE: Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform - Kris Kringle - 08-22-2021 I still need to go over the full thread, but just to get the question out there, is there a reason why OWL couldn’t work as a more public version of the Court in that truly engaged staff discuss proposals on the merits and effect on TSP and issue recommendations based on that, rather than passively collect opinions? RE: Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform - HumanSanity - 08-22-2021 (08-22-2021, 12:15 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: I still need to go over the full thread, but just to get the question out there, is there a reason why OWL couldn’t work as a more public version of the Court in that truly engaged staff discuss proposals on the merits and effect on TSP and issue recommendations based on that, rather than passively collect opinions? I think this is a good way to describe one of the options under consideration / goals of a potential OWL reform. Right now, OWL takes a poll on the RMB and compiles opinions and then instructs the Delegate how to vote. In my opinion (which I believe is a consensus, but maybe I'm wrong), we are unsuccessful at actually eliciting discussion or collective decision-making over WA issues, which depletes our ability to use our WA vote in support of our ideals, regional interests, and also in support of the generalized idea of rigorous debates and intellectualism about WA resolutions (and realization that supporting that can increase our soft power in the WA and act as a basis for inevitably beneficial activity in the region). One potential option is to have a more discussion-oriented format via Discord and/or the forum and/or the RMB followed by issuing recommendations that reflect the consensus (or vote) of that discussion. How exactly that discussion would be run, using what platform, etc. are details that are up for debate. RE: Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform - Apatosaurus - 08-22-2021 I agree with the idea of removing Senior Staff and merging it with usual OWL Staff, but I also would support making OWL a normal ministry, rather than just an office. RE: Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform - Langburn - 08-22-2021 The only solution is to make OWL a standalone ministry and treat it as such. Only then will it be taken seriously and treated equally to all other ministries. If Media has it's own ministry, why doesn't the World Assembly? RE: Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform - HumanSanity - 08-22-2021 I personally see the question of "how should OWL work/process votes" as a distinct question from "should OWL be a standalone Ministry/its leadership be part of the elected Cabinet". OWL can be its own Ministry and still follow the exact same process it currently does. OWL could also have its process wildly altered after discussion by the Direction and their Staff and not be an equal Ministry seat. Perhaps an elected Ministry portfolio could be a mechanism by which to induce change to OWL and accountability for its structure and leadership. These are certainly interrelated questions, but they are not the same, and I'd hate for the response to the questions raised by the original post or the discussion points in the Cabinet thread to simply be "make it a Ministry". RE: Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform - Kris Kringle - 08-22-2021 (08-22-2021, 09:40 PM)Langburn Wrote: The only solution is to make OWL a standalone ministry and treat it as such. Only then will it be taken seriously and treated equally to all other ministries. If Media has it's own ministry, why doesn't the World Assembly? I don’t see how that is “the only solution”. If anything, it isn’t a solution at all. HumanSanity is quite right that the status of OWL is a different question. The focus here should be on how OWL should operate, which has nothing to do with whether the institution is an office or a ministry. RE: Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform - Luca - 08-22-2021 (08-22-2021, 09:40 PM)Langburn Wrote: The only solution is to make OWL a standalone ministry and treat it as such. Only then will it be taken seriously and treated equally to all other ministries. If Media has it's own ministry, why doesn't the World Assembly? I support this position. For some time this area of government has been called an experiment, but we do not have the luxury as a region of our stature to say that a World Assembly department isn't right for us or shouldn't be at the forefront of our consideration. With a substantial margin, the South Pacific has the second most endorsements of any region on NationStates, and is a giant in political power. It is really not acceptable that resolutions take us by surprise, especially when they may be at the core of our cultural or strategic interests. All resolutions should be subject to the process of our debate and consideration, and OWL becoming an electable ministry will promote it being held to direct accountability and ease the difficulty of reform when desired. RE: Assembly Discussion on OWL Reform - HumanSanity - 08-22-2021 For what it's worth, I'm leaning heavily towards supporting elevating OWL to a full WA Ministry, but I think that should be discussed in a separate thread if someone wants to start it, and separately from the bulk of what's in the prior Cabinet discussion which can occur in either OWL-as-is or OWL-as-Ministry. |