And yet the assembly passed a notice that the LC wasn’t doing its job and should be abolished. So no, the LC are not and never have been able to exercise any sort of powers you ascribe to it.

The resolution to which you refer was quite literally due to the Local Council not doing much beyond moderation, so even the Assembly was going with the assumption that the Local Council had vast powers that were being left unused.

Please, what are these vast powers? The LC needs to ask permission to do pretty much anything but suppress posts.

Reply

How could expand on how would you imagine a “stronger” Local Council? Currently the law gives the Local Council plenary power to oversee the gameside community and run its affairs however it sees fit without interference from the Assembly, so I’m not sure how exactly you could one-up that.

I may not make much sense here kringly, but hopefully you'll get my drift...

The charter limits the LC:
to represent the interests of all players in the region,
moderate the Regional Message Board,
encourage activity on the gameside, and
administrate itself on issues unique to the in-game community.

It can't pass laws which are contrary to the Charter or other laws, and it cannot duplicate laws or introduce laws like a lower court as these would impinge on the charters existing laws.

The lc is further limited in its powers by requiring delegates approval on other matters.

Certain powers also exist within the MoC which further restrict the LC.

Therefore, IMO, the Charter and decisions of the Court in 2019 (NHC/Auphelia/CS) which restricted matters of self determination further. Limit the ability of the LC to function to its fullest, Despite this The criticisms I see, as Dry so eloquently puts it, is that (1) the LC moderation is an issue for the Assembly because that's their responsibility and (2) they're encouraging too much gameside activity and (3) administering itself in a way in which the Assembly doesn't like, or in terms of the introduction of a lower court, say, in a way the court doesn't like.

The move for Abolishing the LC is not because the LC js failing in their duties, but instead are actually succeeding in their duties in a way in which the Assembly doesn't like.

If we make a stronger LC, we can build on these successes, instead of the MoC,now.?n, MoM (now defunct), MoE, peing pulled into the gameside. If MoE, MoC, others are not required to oeperate gameside and stay forum/discord side athey don't need to be regional officers and those elements could see an stronger LC (with greater powers)

Check my links.....

SWAN 4 Life
https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1086117

(This post was last modified: 07-19-2022, 10:14 AM by Beepee.)

Reply

I think the root of the LC’s problem lies at the fact the Assembly basically gave it many powers and then didn’t specify its roles in details. Forumside ministries’ roles aren’t really specified in details too but we have precedent from our past and from other regions to decide on what to do. None of this exists for the LC. The LC is a unique institution in the entire NS (I don’t even remember any UCR that has this kind of setup). The LC’s location on the chaotic gameside also restricts it from complex decision-making. I think the best solution available now is just to abolish it really. It is clear that attempts to fix LC as it is now are practically impossible for many reasons I believe are beyond our control (such as the inherent chaos of the RMB) and keeping it is doing more harm than good with the separation between forumside and gameside community (there should be only one TSP community that happens to stay on many platforms due to limited technological capabilities)

Now, abolishing it is easy. Setup a replacement is difficult. We still need moderators/community helpers who are actually passionate about their jobs and the gameside actually likes rather than “employees to quickly fill job vacancies”. We can setup a simple application process for any nation that satisfy certain criteria and have the Cabinet appoints them perhaps. 

Another potential effect of a LC abolition is that the Cabinet will have to significantly step up their gameside presence so gamesiders know who their leaders are as they are not as visible as the LC. This means the Cabinet will have to frequently release information of their decisions and host activities on the gameside. I hopefully expect the community can pay significantly more attention to this for future cabinet elections. I am a pessimistic here though as current forumside politicians probably have posting their latest important announcements on a dispatch as the last priority (or worse, no existence of such thought).

Chief Supervising Armchair

(This post was last modified: 07-19-2022, 10:37 AM by USoVietnam.)

Reply

I think the root of the LC’s problem lies at the fact the Assembly basically gave it many powers and then didn’t specify its roles in details. Forumside ministries’ roles aren’t really specified in details too but we have precedent from our past and from other regions to decide on what to do. None of this exists for the LC. The LC is a unique institution in the entire NS (I don’t even remember any UCR that has this kind of setup). The LC’s location on the chaotic gameside also restricts it from complex decision-making. I think the best solution available now is just to abolish it really. It is clear that attempts to fix LC as it is now are practically impossible for many reasons I believe are beyond our control (such as the inherent chaos of the RMB) and keeping it is doing more harm than good with the separation between forumside and gameside community (there should be only one TSP community that happens to stay on many platforms due to limited technological capabilities)

Again i point to the roles of the LC and say "The inherent chaos of the RMB" , as you put, it is actually what our charter wants.

The "chaotic gameside" isn't actually what restricts complex thinking, as I've outlined above its the restrictions the Charter and the Assembly/courts has put on the LC.

Just because other regions dont have an LC, do we want to be like other regions, is our goal to make ourselves like tep, trr or the like. Or do we want to have our own tsp identity? We used to be party region a long time ago.

Yes there are technological limitations on the gameside elements, but by the same token if you abandon gameside (NS) you could be on a Minecraft server doing exactly this... the whole point is we need to be gameside in some form.

Check my links.....

SWAN 4 Life
https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1086117

(This post was last modified: 07-19-2022, 10:31 AM by Beepee.)

Reply

I think the root of the LC’s problem lies at the fact the Assembly basically gave it many powers and then didn’t specify its roles in details. Forumside ministries’ roles aren’t really specified in details too but we have precedent from our past and from other regions to decide on what to do. None of this exists for the LC. The LC is a unique institution in the entire NS (I don’t even remember any UCR that has this kind of setup). The LC’s location on the chaotic gameside also restricts it from complex decision-making. I think the best solution available now is just to abolish it really. It is clear that attempts to fix LC as it is now are practically impossible for many reasons I believe are beyond our control (such as the inherent chaos of the RMB) and keeping it is doing more harm than good with the separation between forumside and gameside community (there should be only one TSP community that happens to stay on many platforms due to limited technological capabilities)

I actually both agree/disagree with this. We can’t fix the current iteration of LC, it was broken at the start. We can create something that brings value to the people that are mainly gameside and who don’t have advocates for their interests.

People take the benefits of being in a feeder for granted, with the constant influx of players popping into existence without any effort on our part to lure them here via recruiting. That’s what and who the LC should be for, a guide to people to get more involved. By all means, let’s tear it down, but we need to build something in its place, and this time with connections.

Reply

I think the root of the LC’s problem lies at the fact the Assembly basically gave it many powers and then didn’t specify its roles in details. Forumside ministries’ roles aren’t really specified in details too but we have precedent from our past and from other regions to decide on what to do. None of this exists for the LC. The LC is a unique institution in the entire NS (I don’t even remember any UCR that has this kind of setup). The LC’s location on the chaotic gameside also restricts it from complex decision-making. I think the best solution available now is just to abolish it really. It is clear that attempts to fix LC as it is now are practically impossible for many reasons I believe are beyond our control (such as the inherent chaos of the RMB) and keeping it is doing more harm than good with the separation between forumside and gameside community (there should be only one TSP community that happens to stay on many platforms due to limited technological capabilities)

I actually both agree/disagree with this. We can’t fix the current iteration of LC, it was broken at the start. We can create something that brings value to the people that are mainly gameside and who don’t have advocates for their interests.

People take the benefits of being in a feeder for granted, with the constant influx of players popping into existence without any effort on our part to lure them here via recruiting. That’s what and who the LC should be for, a guide to people to get more involved. By all means, let’s tear it down, but we need to build something in its place, and this time with connections.

We definitely need a replacement yes. I don’t believe in the current cabinet or near-future cabinets’ abilities to appoint the correct people for the job. I proposed something similar to TNP gameside advocate above however some forms of gameside inputs would be nice (either directly via a gameside poll or indirectly by making the process of participating in the process easier for interested people).

Chief Supervising Armchair

Reply

It can't pass laws which are contrary to the Charter or other laws, and it cannot duplicate laws or introduce laws like a lower court as these would impinge on the charters existing laws.

I would consider that a given for any government institution in any jurisdiction. You cannot pass laws that are contrary to the constitutional document that holds supremacy over all other laws.

decisions of the Court in 2019 (NHC/Auphelia/CS) which restricted matters of self determination further.

This is a deeply misleading and disingenuous portrayal of events. The cases that you cite referred to local councillors who were accused of arbitrarily suppressing posts or otherwise using their powers in a corrupt manner. These cases were either dismissed or resulted in a finding that the local councillor had indeed behaved in an undue manner. There was no restriction of self-determination beyond the fact that local councillors were prevented from suppressing posts that criticised them.

The move for Abolishing the LC is not because the LC js failing in their duties, but instead are actually succeeding in their duties in a way in which the Assembly doesn't like.

I am quite certain that none of the people who are calling for the abolition of the Local Council do so because they think it is "succeeding" in any way, let alone one that they deem undesirable.

an stronger LC (with greater powers)

I still don't understand what you mean by that. The Local Council has full powers of self-determination within its jurisdiction so already it can do pretty much anything it wants short of usurping into core functions like operating a parallel foreign and security policy. If what you want is the power to pass laws that contravene the Charter then I don't think there is any room for compromise here because that just doesn't make any sense at all.

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

(This post was last modified: 07-19-2022, 11:00 AM by Kris Kringle.)

Reply

It can't pass laws which are contrary to the Charter or other laws, and it cannot duplicate laws or introduce laws like a lower court as these would impinge on the charters existing laws.

I would consider that a given for any government institution in any jurisdiction. You cannot pass laws that are contrary to the constitutional document that holds supremacy over all other laws.

decisions of the Court in 2019 (NHC/Auphelia/CS) which restricted matters of self determination further.

This is a deeply misleading and disingenuous portrayal of events. The cases that you cite referred to local councillors who were accused of arbitrarily suppressing posts or otherwise using their powers in a corrupt manner. These cases were either dismissed or resulted in a finding that the local councillor had indeed behaved in an undue manner. There was no restriction of self-determination beyond the fact that local councillors were prevented from suppressing posts that criticised them.

The move for Abolishing the LC is not because the LC js failing in their duties, but instead are actually succeeding in their duties in a way in which the Assembly doesn't like.

I am quite certain that none of the people who are calling for the abolition of the Local Council do so because they think it is "succeeding" in any way, let alone one that they deem undesirable.

an stronger LC (with greater powers)

I still don't understand what you mean by that. The Local Council has full powers of self-determination within its jurisdiction so already it can do pretty much anything it wants short of usurping into core functions like operating a parallel foreign and security policy. If what you want is the power to pass laws that contravene the Charter then I don't think there is any room for compromise here because that just doesn't make any sense at all.

I'm not saying the LC needs to pass laws contrary to a charter, but was saying rather the powers of the LC are not as 'unlimited' as you alluded.

I am quite certain that none of the people who are calling for the abolition of the Local Council do so because they think it is "succeeding" in any way, let alone one that they deem undesirable.

Exactly, if the LC had self-determination like you suggested then why would they be calling/be able to call for its abolitionn I would argue some are suggesting the abolition of the LC without having considered the consequences.

There are a number of different ways to strengthen LC; one the roles of MoE, MoC could sit within the LC; they could have their own court system; they could have powers for the WFE. They could be in charge of Border Control. None of which are within their current remit.

Check my links.....

SWAN 4 Life
https://www.nationstates.net/page=dispatch/id=1086117

Reply

I think it's worth considering a system where individuals are assigned to conduct engagement with the RMB without them also being part of a weird legislature/government/mod team eldritch horror like the LC.

Spoiler

Republic of Lansoon (Pacifica)

Reply

I think Viet and Pronoun have, generally, framed things well. It seems we have broad consensus on the fact that the current LC isn't working. There's also a point being made (I'm not sure if there's consensus, although I certainly agree) that the LC will need to be replaced with something if it is abolished in its current form.

The question then becomes "what should it be replaced with" and "how should that work"? I want to throw out ideas for people to discuss. I have ideas on this list I prefer over others (I can chime in on this later in the discussion), but I mostly want to throw out several different ways of doing this and start a discussion, hopefully one substantially more productive than the mudslinging above. Obviously potential options also aren't limited to the things I'm about to list, so if other people have modifications or entirely separate ideas, we should discuss them as well.

Proposal 1: Retain the "Local Council", Delegate appointment

• Local Councillors would serve fully at the discretion of the Delegate
  
• Potentially would rebrand the Local Council as "RMB Ambassadors" or "Community Advocates" or something of that nature.
  
• If the Delegate didn't want to manage them hands-on, they could designate a "Local Council Chair" or "Head Community Advocate" or such
  
• "LC" would retain RO powers

Proposal 2: Retain the "Local Council", Prime Minister appointment

• If an elected Cabinet is retained, it could be collective Cabinet appointment or Prime Minister individual appointment. I would favor Prime Minister individual appointment (similar to OWL).
  
• Same as proposal 1, could be rebranded and could have a designated "Chair" or "Leader", and would retain RO powers

Proposal 3: Retain the "Local Council", Joint PM/Delegate appointment

• If there was a desire for balance or power-sharing, the PM and Delegate could jointly appoint and manage the new "Local Council" system
  
• This could either be via appointment of individual members or agreeing on an appointment for the Head/Chair and then the Head/Chair having the more direct micro-managerial role

Proposal 4: Fully abolish the Local Council, replace with a Ministry of Integration/Outreach

• Abolish the Local Council as-is, replace it with a newly created Ministry of Integration/Outreach (if specifically enumerated Ministry portfolios are retained) or as a responsibility for the Prime Minister to appoint a Minister for as they wish

Proposal 5: Fully abolish the Local Council, fold its responsibilities into the Ministry of Engagement

• Self explanatory.

Proposal 6: Fully abolish the Local Council, move its moderation responsibilities to an Admin-appointed team of RMB Moderators and its promotion/engagement/community responsibilities to Ministry of Culture/Engagement

• 'Moderation' of the RMB is seen as an OOC issue, therefore should be done by an appointed team of RMB Moderators
  
• Community management/promotion is an IC issue and can be transferred to the relevant Cabinet Ministries

Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces
Ambassador to Balder
Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense

Reply