| [split] Amendment to Citizenship Removals 1.2.7 of the Charter |
I honestly think we should consider going back to a system where the delegate is not the head of state.
Does our WA delegate need to be elected if we have a prime minister who runs our government? With the new influence system coups have the potential to be brutal. Putting someone trusted and dedicated to this community to ensure it's stability makes sense for our long term security Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk
The 16th Delegate of The South Pacific
(06-25-2014, 10:25 AM)southern bellz Wrote: I honestly think we should consider going back to a system where the delegate is not the head of state.Before this thread gets too long, I'd advise the Chair split this and the posts below into a separate thread, as it is a discussion with its own merits, worthy of its own thread.
I think it's giving up a lot for very little in return. We have the CSS has our main protection against coups. As long as the CSS does its job and maintains reasonable endorsement counts, then the system should work. Distressingly, we currently have some CSS members with very low endorsement counts.
I don't really want to return to the days where a Fudgetopia-like person controls the delegate seat for years. Delegate elections drive activity and ensure accountability. Even if we separate the head of government from the head of state, we're such a small community that whoever is delegate would probably have a lot of say-so in the region... but with no way to hold them democratically accountable.
I mean ... I'm of SB's mindset, but we all have a pretty good idea of the type of governmental structure I endorse. I don't think that system really gives up that much. Maybe "democratic accountability," but the delegate would certainly still be held the to terms of the Charter. And if they acted outside of their interests, it would be possible to vote to remove them. However, the idea is that the person who is delegate would be a very trusted member of the community.
That system worked for ... how many years before we started holding forum elections for delegate?
-tsunamy
[forum admin]
There's a lot more to being delegate than just regional security.
- Managing the WFE to coordinate TSP's cultural activities. - Managing the Flag to coordinate TSP's cultural activities. - Voting in the World Assembly. - Suppressing RMB posts. - Managing polls - which may involve TSP's cultural activities. - Any communication with the region ought to be done through the delegate usually. And more... I think it would lead to a lot of problems. A lot of problems. If the delegate wasn't on the same page as the president in regards to culture, WA Affairs and regional affairs, even FA... well, crap, it'd be very problematic. Delegates wouldn't have to outright refuse to do things, they might just footdrag or be inactive (and keep tarting). I know if I were delegate/president, this would not be my choice. It'd be a terrible arrangement and I'm not sure why we would do it. As President, I'd be really annoyed with losing ultimate control over culture and WA voting and stuff, because my term's performance would be beholden with the "delegate" 's performance.
(06-25-2014, 10:25 AM)southern bellz Wrote: I honestly think we should consider going back to a system where the delegate is not the head of state. Yes. We need the Delegate to be an elected office and the head of state, because of the reasons Unibot has listed. I fully agree with him in that aspect. (06-25-2014, 10:25 AM)southern bellz Wrote: With the new influence system coups have the potential to be brutal. Putting someone trusted and dedicated to this community to ensure it's stability makes sense for our long term security We have to stop thinking as if we were could to be couped as soon as we lower our guards. We have a Committee for State Security precisely to ensure regional security. There is a point when security measures become excessive, in view of the likelihood of us being couped. 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'm going to have to agree with Unibot here.
(06-25-2014, 06:13 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: We have to stop thinking as if we were could to be couped as soon as we lower our guards. We have a Committee for State Security precisely to ensure regional security. There is a point when security measures become excessive, in view of the likelihood of us being couped. What we have to remember is that with 200+ endos a traditional R/D coup is nearly impossible. The only people with the endo counts to practically try anything are the Delegate, Vice Delegate and the CSS. The difference between Kris (250 endos) and the second highest, B&N, is 48 endos right now. And it gets progressively farther. We only even have four above 150. So unless a CSS member plans to rally dozens of invaders, TSP is safe from a raid. All that leaves is the delegate (and sometimes the vice delegate). We need to remember that Milo was an isolated case; he wasn't a sleeper, he decided to go rogue after a long time of loyal service. Those are rare exceptions.
It's also important to remember that there's nothing we do to stop a delegate going rogue, if they really want to. The best we can do is have high endorsement contenders to replace them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Agree with Unibot and Kris, we need the Delegate to be both head of state and an elected office.
/thread
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 |
![[+]](/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Former Offices
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |