As of the statement:

"Moving forward, should the LC wish to do so, the Council encourages the LC to submit a written request on these forums formally petitioning for a reconsideration of this matter."

This is a request from an LC for the re-evaluation of the distribution of border control powers.

This has been an issue for a while now. Many LC's and game side members of the South Pacific have requested that the LC be given border control powers so that the issue with spammers and the absence of BC members can be dealt with. Over my time as Deputy Councillor and now currently Local Councillor, I have seen many events in which a spammer has wreaked havoc on the RMB for a long period of time. Usually this can happen for around half an hour but the worst I have seen was an hour. This usually results in the spamming becoming a game mod issue which is disappointing as it shows we cannot deal with our own problems without a mod having to get involved. Many residents believe that this is worthy of the LC's getting BC powers. However, due to understandable security concerns, the security council have decided that this is not necessary. I believe however, that there may be a way around this. Below, I am going to explain how I believe the LC can wield border control powers without posing a significant risk to the regional security of the South Pacific.

In order for this to work, the following set of criteria could be implemented. The Security Council should evaluate members of the Local Council in order to determine who they believe would be mature and able enough to use BC powers. Another way would be for prospecting LC's to submit a request themselves for BC powers outlining why they believe they would be able to use these powers without abusing them and also outlining any weaknesses they believe might hinder their ability to use them. Once a member/s of the LC have been chosen and given BC powers, they should follow the following set of criteria:

1. Members of the LC can only ban nations who have only entered with the intent to spam, troll, abuse or cause chaos in the region. This includes any obvious ad bots, Nazi nations (including any other racist intent), and ban evaders.
   
2. Members of the LC can only ban above nations if the nation in question has an influence level below that of the maximum attainable influence score of a nation without endorsements.
   
3. Members of the LC can only ban above nations if the nation in question has a residency level below that of 50 days (could be 25 if that is believed to be too much)
   
4. Members of the LC must inform either a member of the security council or the delegate of a ban so that they can check that all of the above criteria have been met during a ban by either a personal forum and/or discord message.
   

I believe that this criteria should be able to prevent any significant risk to the South Pacific. However, if this is believed to not be sufficient enough, members of the LC can always make a forum account so that faster communication can be achieved.

Thanks,

Trivalve, Local Councillor

(This post was last modified: 09-06-2022, 10:02 PM by Trivalve.)

Reply

Security concerns are definitely a valid qualm. An RO who is granted BC authority can literally eject…anyone in TSP. Yes, even the Delegate. So, obviously, they need to be given to a trusted individual, which is why only the Delegate and members of the Council on Regional Security are granted with them (PM too?).

Drystar was granted with them last LC term. I do believe that Drystar has held that position a few times before and that was on of the primary reasons the CRS allowed them to have that authority. His experience. To my knowledge, neither you nor The free romanians have held any elected office in TSP, besides your current position. Again, I’m not sure about Curly, however, I’d think he has held a position on the Local Council before.

Now, it also does a flip-flop. To my knowledge, you are the only LC that is a Legislator. Well, you recently became a Legislator at one’s encouragement. Now, again, to my knowledge, you haven’t joined our regional Discord server. I have a vivid memory (please correct me of this isn’t true) of you saying that “I have already too many servers to check on, and I don’t need another one.” Something along those lines. And that is, well, understandable. However, you do hold an elected office in the South Pacific, one where the people chose you to be their Local Councilor. Keep that in mind for the next paragraph.

Now, there has long been, especially here on the Forums, a belief that the Local Council is a failure of an institution, and that its members have been uncooperative and unreliable. I do support the Local Council, however, I do feel like this term’s Councilors aren’t as oriented into the offsite adventures TSP holds. For Discord, I know Curly has discord, however doesn’t check it, or I never see Mighty Joe Young on there. Interesting name (I believe that is his handle). I know from TFR that they restricted from using Discord, which is totally fine. However, one who can use it, better yet has it and checks it, should take the opportunity of getting involved on the offsite.

I would support this generally; especially in light of what happened today, however, we need to have our absolute trust in the individuals granted BC authority. A lot of times trust can be associated with how well someone knows somebody. And assuming that you are a new Legislator, and new to the Forums, and the other two Councilors aren’t active offsite, there is going to be a lot to prove in order for me to believe that you deserve BC authority.

And on the idea of a Forums account for better communication: Discord, for BC reasons is more ideal. You can ping all who have the authority, with just a @BorderControl. Forums, well, it might take a little longer.

maluhia
minister of culture
ambassador to lazarus
roleplayer
 

 

(This post was last modified: 09-06-2022, 10:27 PM by maluhia.)

Reply

First things first, your encouragement didn't make me become a Legislator. I was already planning on joining before. Please stop saying this. 

Secondly, this is not a request for me to get a BC powers. This is a request for the CRS to give the LC's they trust BC powers.

Further more on you topic of inexperience, I have held the position of DC meaning I have in a way served two terms on a game side government position. (Well currently serving second term)

(This post was last modified: 09-06-2022, 10:42 PM by Trivalve.)

Reply

I would argue that your "criteria" for banjection are irrelevant, unless you can outline a way to mechanically enforce them.

Spoiler

Republic of Lansoon (Pacifica)

Reply

I would argue that your "criteria" for banjection are irrelevant, unless you can outline a way to mechanically enforce them.

Well if the criteria is intentionally not met, then removal of BC powers would occur along with the possibility of losing position as LC.

Reply

I would argue that your "criteria" for banjection are irrelevant, unless you can outline a way to mechanically enforce them.

Well if the criteria is intentionally not met, then removal of BC powers would occur along with the possibility of losing position as LC.

Regardless, the intent should be to prevent abuse of Border Control powers in the first place.

Spoiler

Republic of Lansoon (Pacifica)

Reply

I would argue that your "criteria" for banjection are irrelevant, unless you can outline a way to mechanically enforce them.

Well if the criteria is intentionally not met, then removal of BC powers would occur along with the possibility of losing position as LC.

Regardless, the intent should be to prevent abuse of Border Control powers in the first place.

Well wouldn't the threat of losing your position as LC help in preventing it from happening?

(This post was last modified: 09-07-2022, 12:15 AM by Trivalve.)

Reply

First things first, your encouragement didn't make me become a Legislator. I was already planning on joining before. Please stop saying this. 

Secondly, this is not a request for me to get a BC powers. This is a request for the CRS to give the LC's they trust BC powers.

Further more on you topic of inexperience, I have held the position of DC meaning I have in a way served two terms on a game side government position. (Well currently serving second term)

I don’t think serving as a Deputy Councilor is going to cut it in my view of criterion. This is your first term as Local Councilor. I do in fact trust you, however, to play it safe, it’s still your first term.

maluhia
minister of culture
ambassador to lazarus
roleplayer
 

 

Reply

First things first, your encouragement didn't make me become a Legislator. I was already planning on joining before. Please stop saying this. 

Secondly, this is not a request for me to get a BC powers. This is a request for the CRS to give the LC's they trust BC powers.

Further more on you topic of inexperience, I have held the position of DC meaning I have in a way served two terms on a game side government position. (Well currently serving second term)

I don’t think serving as a Deputy Councilor is going to cut it in my view of criterion. This is your first term as Local Councilor. I do in fact trust you, however, to play it safe, it’s still your first term.

Yet again, this is not a request for me to get BC powers. This is a request for the CRS to give the LC's they trust BC powers

Reply

Given the last request we received from Trivalve to ban somebody was for completely innocuous RMB posts that they just didn’t like, I’m disinclined to think this is a good idea at this time.

As long as my vote needs to be cast to expand BC authority to any LC, I’m going to need to see a revamped and far more reasonable RMB moderation policy and then stop seeing overzealous moderation.

Reply