| Amendment to Citizenship Removals 1.2.7 of the Charter |
|
I think forum communities, including TSP, do a poor job at giving people opportunities to participate. We *could* actually let them participate in elections and give them opportunities to contribute to discussions. The attitude of "let them come to us", majorly drives down participation and not for the better. It's a conservative attitude and it may make people feel smug and self-important, but it doesn't help the region grow.
How?
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
TSP has no trouble with regional growth. We lack growth in the forum community. Incentivizing people to stay off the forums isn't going to lead to some great utopia. It's not "smug and self-important" to recognize that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Welcome to the game!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A subset who actually cares enough to involve itself in the mechanics of regional governance. We have literally the lowest barriers to entry of any GCR region, so your criticism on that front falls apart.
Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making
Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator ![[Image: B9ytUsy.png]](https://i.imgur.com/B9ytUsy.png)
I dunno that we have the lowest, but it's certainly low enough to not become an issue, if you don't turn it into one.
The Third Imperium
Journalist, South Pacific Independent News Network (SPINN) Provost, Magisterium Sergeant, East Pacific Sovereign Army Journalist, East Pacific News Service Foreign Affairs Minister, The West Pacific (06-21-2014, 05:36 PM)Belschaft Wrote: A subset who actually cares enough to involve itself in the mechanics of regional governance. We have literally the lowest barriers to entry of any GCR region, so your criticism on that front falls apart. We see growth in the forum community, but it's not growth among the region, but a lot of it is other feederites joining TSP. I agree that TSP has the most open barriers and relative to other GCRs is doing well to encourage members to join our forums - but that's only relative to other GCRs. In all actuality, all of the GCRs do a piss poor job and probably deliberately: it scares citizens to think that they could broaden governance to include more voices from within the region.
(06-21-2014, 07:59 PM)Unibot Wrote: In all actuality, all of the GCRs do a piss poor job and probably deliberately: it scares citizens to think that they could broaden governance to include more voices from within the region. Please don't include the South Pacific in that group. We do not try to scare people away. We thrive when newcomers get involved in the governance of the region, not the other way around. 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
I don't see how GCRs are "worse" than any other regions. What exactly are we doing poorly? According to this thread, it's that we follow the standard citizenship model of NS. We don't require anything more than any other region with an offsite government. We likely require less!
So I don't buy for a second that we are doing a "piss poor job" or that we are afraid of more people coming into government. That's baseless BS. No other region does what's being asked of in this thread. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
PREVIOUS ROLES 
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |