Users browsing this thread:

***sandaoguo*** · 07-22-2019, 12:03 PM

The biggest issue with this is that it would prevent legitimate new people from voting.

There really isn’t a way, unfortunately, to distinguish between legit new nations and bad actors using new nations. The vulnerabilities inherent in RMB polling are why I opposed in-game Delegate elections in the first place, and why we have the initial forum round. The two people we send are already vetted by the forum community, and we have stricter rules in place about who gets to vote.

The bigger issue in this election was the DM campaigning, in which inactive people were corralled to revive their nations and vote for a particular candidate.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**Belschaft** · 07-22-2019, 01:27 PM

This is a classic trade off between increased democracy and increased security, and there isn’t really a right answer to it.

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

PREVIOUS ROLES

**Jay Coop** · 07-22-2019, 04:45 PM

I'm not gonna name names, but I noticed that a nation with 6 million population joined the World Assembly yesterday, voted for a candidate, congratulated the candidate, then resigned from the World Assembly only shortly after the message of congratulations.

4× Cabinet minister /// 1× OWL director /// CRS member /// SPSF

My History

(This post was last modified: 07-22-2019, 04:46 PM by Jay Coop.)

**Amerion** · 07-25-2019, 02:25 AM

Are there any suggestions/further discussion for this proposal?

Divine Owl · 07-25-2019, 08:02 PM

I like this. I think that new nations that don't quite understand what's going on should not matter so much to elections. Also, it's pretty easy to get to 2000 influence, as long as you're in the WA.

AIDENFIEELD

Legislator in TSP | Active User of the RMB | Former Local Councillor | Member of The Ministry Of Regional Affairs

The Sakhalinsk Empire · 07-26-2019, 07:05 AM

(07-25-2019, 08:02 PM)Divine Owl Wrote: I like this. I think that new nations that don't quite understand what's going on should not matter so much to elections. Also, it's pretty easy to get to 2000 influence, as long as you're in the WA.

Considering that only WA nations are allowed to vote, that seems like a fair point.

The Sakhalinsk Empire, Legislator of the South Pacific
Currently a citizen and legislator of TSP. I am active as Sverigesriket in Europe.

Complete Conflict of Interest

**Seraph** · 07-26-2019, 07:49 AM

Many of those nations only join the WA to vote, or, if they are in the SPSF, only switch to vote. It would be difficult for them to maintain the required endorsement level under such circumstances (though not impossible.) Personally, I'm not keen on this amendment as I don't think it adds as much to regional security as it takes away from a sense of open gameside democracy. I'd also be surprised if it passed a gameside referendum.

Founder of the Church of the South Pacific [Forum Thread] [Discord], a safe place to discuss spirituality for people of all faiths and none (currently looking for those interested in prayer and/or "home" groups);
And The Silicon Pens [Discord], a writer's group for the South Pacific and beyond!

Yahweo usenneo ir varleo, ihraneo jurlaweo hraseu seu, ir jiweveo arladi.

Salma 145:8

translate

(This post was last modified: 07-26-2019, 04:48 PM by Seraph.)

***Roavin*** · 07-26-2019, 09:47 PM

(07-26-2019, 07:49 AM)Seraph Wrote: Many of those nations only join the WA to vote, or, if they are in the SPSF, only switch to vote. It would be difficult for them to maintain the required endorsement level under such circumstances (though not impossible.) Personally, I'm not keen on this amendment as I don't think it adds as much to regional security as it takes away from a sense of open gameside democracy. I'd also be surprised if it passed a gameside referendum.

Most SPSF members will usually have sufficient influence in the region to still be permitted to vote, as SPSF is ordered to switch their WA status to TSP when not on a mission.

Volaworand · 07-31-2019, 07:56 AM

I'm pretty uncomfortable with the idea of restricting voters based on influence. Since the Forumside has already vetted both candidates in round 1, the gain of saving us from meddling really isn't worth the ability of new nations to actively take part in the region's largest and most visible election.

Continuing to grow our voter base by promoting SWAN and involving more native nations in our political process seems the more democratic approach.

Legislator | Local Councilor | Aspiring TSP Curmudgeon
Messages archived by the Ministry Of the Regal Executive - Bureaucratic Services

***Kris Kringle*** · 07-31-2019, 09:37 AM

Not to weigh in one way or another, but I don’t think the forum does any kind of “vetting” to the degree that it would prevent all kinds of security issues.

Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

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