Yeah — we wouldn't want to prohibit the DC from having any number of endorsements (as long as they aren't overtaking the delegate) because we need the high endos in case of a coup.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

Reply

I was genuinely hopeful that these ridiculous proposals were just dead and forgotten.

I’ll note the continued general lack of any breaches of our existing security infrastructure or major threats that would justify such radical alterations to our democratic structures.

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

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply

I was genuinely hopeful that these ridiculous proposals were just dead and forgotten.

I’ll note the continued general lack of any breaches of our existing security infrastructure or major threats that would justify such radical alterations to our democratic structures.

Last year was a very very close call to the same 2016-style-coup which the CRS as of now couldn’t stop it even if they knew everything in advance, not to mention we have had a few spies here and there due to poor communication between existing institutions. A reform on the matter is necessary. This proposal doesn’t significantly alter anything other than separate CRS into two entities and give one of them more powers on critical issues. Election procedures and roles of existing offices are not changed at all.

Worth noting that this proposal is mostly dead because the original author didn’t plan everything ahead.

Chief Supervising Armchair

Reply

I was genuinely hopeful that these ridiculous proposals were just dead and forgotten.

I’ll note the continued general lack of any breaches of our existing security infrastructure or major threats that would justify such radical alterations to our democratic structures.

Last year was a very very close call to the same 2016-style-coup which the CRS as of now couldn’t stop it even if they knew everything in advance, not to mention we have had a few spies here and there due to poor communication between existing institutions.

Um... What? Because this seems to be the first I'm hearing of any of that.

Unless you're referring to a thing that might of happened, if another thing that could of happened happened, but didn't because our democratic institutions stopped it. And then that if that thing happened if the other things happened, the CRS would definitely have been unable to detect or prevent such a thing from happening.

And also therefore on that basis we need to radically alter the state of our democracy, as this new body with the same people involved and same anti-coup mechanics definitely would have detected the thing that could have happened if the other things happened, which the existing set of the same people supposedly would have definitely been helpless against.

A reform on the matter is necessary. This proposal doesn’t significantly alter anything other than separate CRS into two entities and give one of them more powers on critical issues. Election procedures and roles of existing offices are not changed at all.

Worth noting that this proposal is mostly dead because the original author didn’t plan everything ahead.

"This proposal doesn’t significantly alter anything other than fundamentally changing the nature of our democracy by creating a powerful group able to make changes to and override our democratic norms and institutions."

I was genuinely hopeful that these ridiculous proposals were just dead and forgotten.

I’ll note the continued general lack of any breaches of our existing security infrastructure or major threats that would justify such radical alterations to our democratic structures.

I'm with Bel on this one. These proposals are always all just oligarchy for the promise of security. It's all built on exaggerated fears. Fear of the worst case scenarios of hypotheticals, when our region has continued to handle these situations with existing institutions. The hypothetical gains to security are not worth the real cost to our democracy.

Reply

Assuming that Viet is talking about Tim and Escade (if he's not then I have no idea what he could possibly be referring to otherwise) then I just want to point out the security side of that situation. If I seem unconcerned about its possibilities, it's not out of incompetence it's because it wasn't the near-miss coup Viet is implying.

For a coup like that to have happened, there's multiple layers of things that would have had to happen:

• Tim made it onto the gameside ballot. However, the electoral system that allowed radical candidates such as him to so easily make it into the second round since been reformed. An effort lead by those involved in regional security, specifically to reduce this risk.
  
• Then the candidate actually has to win on gameside.
  
• If they decide to actually coup, then they need a base of high endo nations they can use. Tim did not have that.
  
• The first route for doing so is to turn members of regional security. This is what Hileville did. But a series of reforms since then changed the requirements of the CRS to make this difficult to pull off, and the risk of it happening with Tim was negligible.
  
• The other route is to import nations. This is slow and obvious, and if he was bringing in enough to try and take down the CRS it would have been quite obvious.
  
• SWAN in general makes a coup harder now generally, due to the rise in endorsements globally.
  

The CRS and associated regional security is not incompetent. We know what we're doing. We can handle a crisis. Most of the CRS has fought a coup before.

Is our regional security perfect? Of course not, nothing is. But it does its job. We don't need to undermine the core tenets of our democracy out of fear for things that are under control.

Reply

I was genuinely hopeful that these ridiculous proposals were just dead and forgotten.

I’ll note the continued general lack of any breaches of our existing security infrastructure or major threats that would justify such radical alterations to our democratic structures.

Just because something hasn't failed yet doesn't mean it can't be improved; They don't prohibit new laws and amendments in the US and UK because the government hasn't been couped yet.

We have the WA infrastructure and activity that this can be done right now. We aren't in 2010 anymore.

Midwesterner. Political nerd. Chipotle enthusiast. 
Minister of Culture of the South Pacific // Former Prime Minister

Reply

I was genuinely hopeful that these ridiculous proposals were just dead and forgotten.

I’ll note the continued general lack of any breaches of our existing security infrastructure or major threats that would justify such radical alterations to our democratic structures.

Just because something hasn't failed yet doesn't mean it can't be improved; They don't prohibit new laws and amendments in the US and UK because the government hasn't been couped yet.

We have the WA infrastructure and activity that this can be done right now. We aren't in 2010 anymore. 

Read: "If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is" ... just like the US government.

"...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!!

TSP Forum & Discord Mod (4/19-Present)
Niagara Founder (2018-Present)

TSP MoRA (6/19-10/19)
TSP Asso. Justice (4/19-3/20)
TSP Deputy CoA (8/18 - 4/19)
TSP CSS (2/14-10/14)
TSP High Court Justice (4/14 - 5/14)
TSP CoA (12/13 - 3/14)
TSP Vice Delegate (8/13 - 12/13)
TSP MoS (9/12 - 12/12)
TSP MoFA (5/12 - 9/12)
TSP Forum Admin (2014)
TSP Craziest (12/12 - 3/13 -- 8/13 - 10/14 -- 2/15 - 6/17 -- 2/18 - 6/19)
Former Founder of Richmond
Former something in Europia
Former something in Balder

Quotes

5:19PM, 3/25/12
Hileville - LR and Rebel-topia are going to break the forum. 103 posts between the two of them so far today
LadyRebels - Yes we are implementing our evil plan to take over, just wanted ya'll to know that

---

[1:22 PM] Rebeltopia: *beats up the Polandar Bear*
[1:22 PM] Polandar Bear: :dizzy_face:
[1:23 PM] Polandar Bear: I'm endangered!
[1:23 PM] Rebeltopia: Endangered of being beated up!
[1:23 PM] Polander Bear: "Beated up" - Rebeltopia, 2018

---

[6:09 PM] Seraph: Who knew ORCS could be so informative?
[6:10 PM] Nakari: ORCS is truly ORChestral to our understanding of law.
[6:11 PM] Seraph: It's the ORCSue of all our legal knowledge.
[6:11 PM] Nakari: its magical. must have been created with sORCSery.

---

Nakarisaurus: islands are you just jealous of the boots
Roavin: islands is jealous of the entire package
Satan: ^ this
Islands of Unakarity: Im jealous of the wife, and that mora election a while back
Roavin: punnuendo both intended and not intended

Reply

I’ll note the continued general lack of any breaches of our existing security infrastructure or major threats that would justify such radical alterations to our democratic structures.

And also therefore on that basis we need to radically alter the state of our democracy, as this new body with the same people involved and same anti-coup mechanics definitely would have detected the thing that could have happened if the other things happened, which the existing set of the same people supposedly would have definitely been helpless against.

"This proposal doesn’t significantly alter anything other than fundamentally changing the nature of our democracy by creating a powerful group able to make changes to and override our democratic norms and institutions."

I'm with Bel on this one. These proposals are always all just oligarchy for the promise of security. It's all built on exaggerated fears. Fear of the worst case scenarios of hypotheticals, when our region has continued to handle these situations with existing institutions. The hypothetical gains to security are not worth the real cost to our democracy.

Is our regional security perfect? Of course not, nothing is. But it does its job. We don't need to undermine the core tenets of our democracy out of fear for things that are under control.

Okay, I gotta call this out for what it is. Fearmongering propaganda.

Please, if any of these proposals are as horrible as you say they are then show us. Show us where we propose such an infringement of our democratic processes. Show us what it is that leads you to this rhetoric. Show us what makes you say that this is in any way an installation of some oligarchy that doesn't exist.

Surely, if these proposals are as horrible as you two are making them out to be, then you can show us. Demonstrate it. Explain it. Whatever it is that's more than just "my democracy!".

Just show us.

Go on.

We're waiting.

(This post was last modified: 08-03-2019, 04:04 AM by Roavin.)

Reply

I’ll note the continued general lack of any breaches of our existing security infrastructure or major threats that would justify such radical alterations to our democratic structures.

And also therefore on that basis we need to radically alter the state of our democracy, as this new body with the same people involved and same anti-coup mechanics definitely would have detected the thing that could have happened if the other things happened, which the existing set of the same people supposedly would have definitely been helpless against.

"This proposal doesn’t significantly alter anything other than fundamentally changing the nature of our democracy by creating a powerful group able to make changes to and override our democratic norms and institutions."

I'm with Bel on this one. These proposals are always all just oligarchy for the promise of security. It's all built on exaggerated fears. Fear of the worst case scenarios of hypotheticals, when our region has continued to handle these situations with existing institutions. The hypothetical gains to security are not worth the real cost to our democracy.

Is our regional security perfect? Of course not, nothing is. But it does its job. We don't need to undermine the core tenets of our democracy out of fear for things that are under control.

Okay, I gotta call this out for what it is. Fearmongering propaganda.

Please, if any of these proposals are as horrible as you say they are then show us. Show us where we propose such an infringement of our democratic processes. Show us what it is that leads you to this rhetoric. Show us what makes you say that this is in any way an installation of some oligarchy that doesn't exist.

Surely, if these proposals are as horrible as you two are making them out to be, then you can show us. Demonstrate it. Explain it. Whatever it is that's more than just "my democracy!".

Just show us.

Go on.

We're waiting.

To quote myself from the second page of this thread;

You are proposing a system were an unelected, self-selecting group is in charge of;

1. Deciding who can become a legislator
2. Deciding who can stand to be Delegate

It's almost like you went out of your way to create the most oligarchic and least democratic system you could think of. This is an absurd proposal, completely out of keeping with fifteen years of TSP's traditions. It is the apparatus of a security state that makes Balder look transparent and democratic.

The creation of a security body with sweeping powers over our elections and the assembly is antithetical to democracy. The powers you propose to give the DC are unprecedented in TSP history and on a fundamental level incompatible with an open, pluralistic and democratic region.

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

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

(This post was last modified: 08-03-2019, 08:48 AM by Belschaft.)

Reply

I have to say ... I don't quite understand the hostility to this idea?

It's one thing to say the CSI is being given more power or what not, but breaking the the CRS into the CSI and DC would actually give up another layer of democratic protections, no?

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

Reply