Users browsing this thread:

***Roavin*** · 12-08-2018, 04:48 PM

Bel and Bzern, would your concerns be assuaged by my earlier suggestion that appointments should in general be the Cabinet's mandate?

***Roavin*** · 12-08-2018, 07:34 PM

On the service track record: I'll add listing one as a campaign requirement to the recap.

On junior vs senior CSI: I imagine the juniors to do the day to day business, while the seniors have access to all materials. I can imagine juniors only being briefed on a need-to-know basis for the very very sensitive stuff. At RL institutions of this sort, not every member is permitted to know everything either, for good reasons.

On CSI chairperson: I've added that to the recap, adding that this should be a senior (obviously), though not necessarily the most senior (in line with what Glen said).

On appointments, I've added that to the recap for now, though I'm still waiting to hear Bel/Bzern/Frost.

Recap

The CRS and LegComm are dissolved.
The DC (Defense Council) is formed, consisting of high-influence high-endorsement nations.
The CSI (Council on Security and Intelligence) is formed, consisting of trusted individuals with, ideally, experience in regional security.
The DC's requirements are the mechanical requirements of the current CRS (maybe slightly adjusted to fit with the times), plus approval by the CSI.
The DC tracks and looks after things like SWAN and enforces the endocap as per CSI recommendation.
The Delegate must be a legislator and either on the DC or be otherwise eligible for DC, and must post a service record with their campaign.
The CSI handles Legislator Applications.
The Cabinet receives a general mandate for handling all appointments (and the assembly maintains its mandate to confirm all appointments)
The CSI is split into junior and senior ranks to lower the barrier of entry whilst ensuring confidentiality
The CSI will be chaired by a senior member

**Seraph** · 12-08-2018, 07:52 PM

(12-08-2018, 07:34 PM)Roavin Wrote: On the service track record: I'll add listing one as a campaign requirement to the recap.

I think I'd prefer something concrete and measurable in the service record requirement, like 'must have served at least one term in an elected role, or at least three months in an appointed one' or even just 'must demonstrate committed involvement in at least one government institution' possibly with a basic reference from a superior. These would need refined too ensure they were fit for purpose without being needlessly restrictive, of course, but I'm just shooting from the hip rn.

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

***Roavin*** · 12-10-2018, 04:37 AM

(12-08-2018, 07:52 PM)Seraph Wrote:
(12-08-2018, 07:34 PM)Roavin Wrote: On the service track record: I'll add listing one as a campaign requirement to the recap.

I think I'd prefer something concrete and measurable in the service record requirement, like 'must have served at least one term in an elected role, or at least three months in an appointed one' or even just 'must demonstrate committed involvement in at least one government institution' possibly with a basic reference from a superior. These would need refined too ensure they were fit for purpose without being needlessly restrictive, of course, but I'm just shooting from the hip rn.

That works. Would you prefer that to be part of the DC requirement, or an explicit Delegate requirement?

**Seraph** · 12-10-2018, 04:56 AM

I think it's more relevant to the delegate than to the DC, personally.

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

***Roavin*** · 12-10-2018, 08:37 AM

I took a brief look at our extant laws to see what the consequences of what's currently in the recap would be.

Currently, the MoMA may establish an intelligence office with the CRS. I'd drop that altogether.
Currently, the CRS may declare a state of emergency. I'd replace that with the CSI.
Currently, the line of succession for the Delegacy is Del+CRS+PM. I'd exchange CRS for DC here.
Appointments would be a general mandate for the Cabinet, enshrined in the Charter.
Currently, CRS appoints an EC. This would be replaced by CSI.
Border Control Act: This will be difficult to split up. Do we say taht the CSI has all the authority here, or is some of that with the DC?
Parole Board: Currently members of CRS, Court, and CoA. Replace with CSI?
Proscription Act: Replace CRS with CSI
Regional Communication Act: Replace CRS with CSI
Regional Officers Act: Replace CRS BCs with something like "2 or more DCs", but keep the mandate to order the appointment of further BCs with the CSI.
Legion of Honor Award Act: ... can we just repeal this? - the Valor thing would be CSI rather than CRS.

**Rebeltopia** · 12-10-2018, 02:13 PM

(12-08-2018, 07:52 PM)Seraph Wrote:
(12-08-2018, 07:34 PM)Roavin Wrote: On the service track record: I'll add listing one as a campaign requirement to the recap.

I think I'd prefer something concrete and measurable in the service record requirement, like 'must have served at least one term in an elected role, or at least three months in an appointed one' or even just 'must demonstrate committed involvement in at least one government institution' possibly with a basic reference from a superior. These would need refined too ensure they were fit for purpose without being needlessly restrictive, of course, but I'm just shooting from the hip rn.

Heres my $0.02 from about a month ago.

Rebeltopia Wrote:Id suggest a hard-number stance... Maybe SPDR: 50k, endos: minimum 2/3 of the cap, at least 3 full terms (or the monthly equivalent) in an elected office in TSP. This could be verified by the CSI, and appealable to the court. Its a set regulation, rather than some arbitrary vote by those already in power.

Id be willing to come off those elected time-frames a little. Maybe 2 terms. And provision of appointed positions plus, as Seraph added, a "basic reference from a superior."

"...if you're normal, the crowd will accept you. But if you're deranged, the crowd will make you their leader." - Christopher Titus
Deranged in NS since 2011

One and ONLY minion of LadyRebels
The OUTRAGEOUS CRAZY other half of LadyElysium

POSITIONS! POSITIONS, EVERYONE!!

Quotes

**Belschaft** · 12-10-2018, 02:27 PM

As I’ve said before, I’m happy to support splitting the CRS into a “Endo-wall” Group and a Security and Intelligence group, but I cannot support giving the proposed S&I group control of our elections and legislative body.

I would assume that these proposals would be subject to a vote of the in-game region; can the Chair confirm this?

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

***Roavin*** · 12-10-2018, 03:55 PM

(12-10-2018, 02:27 PM)Belschaft Wrote: I cannot support giving the proposed S&I group control of our elections and legislative body.

Again, in which way would the proposed CSI have control that the combined CRS+LegComm don't have right now anyway?

(12-10-2018, 02:27 PM)Belschaft Wrote: I would assume that these proposals would be subject to a vote of the in-game region; can the Chair confirm this?

I'm operating on the assumption that an in-game vote will be required.

**Belschaft** · 12-10-2018, 04:55 PM

(12-10-2018, 03:55 PM)Roavin Wrote:
(12-10-2018, 02:27 PM)Belschaft Wrote: I cannot support giving the proposed S&I group control of our elections and legislative body.

Again, in which way would the proposed CSI have control that the combined CRS+LegComm don't have right now anyway?

CRS, and to a much greater extent LegCom, are fundamentally different kinds of organisations to your proposed CSI. This is not a like-for-like comparison.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES