Users browsing this thread:

***Tsunamy*** · 12-15-2019, 10:58 AM

I'm ... skeptical of this for a number of reasons.

First, where are we getting people to (competitively) run for these positions?

Second, we've yet to have a sustained WA Advisor let alone making it a Cabinet position. If CS is doing it — great — but let's just appoint him as WA advisor and be done with it.

Third, Home Affairs seems ... redundant and like it would step on the toes of the LC. And, we rarely have someone who is active enough offsite and still integrated in the RMB community to make this feasible. Finally, I think this would be a huge step back from RMB voting and governance.

Finally, I've always been skeptical of a Minister of Media since ... in a lot of ways it's a minister of propaganda (imo). Although, considering we don't have an active independent press, it might be useful ...

Anyhow. Sorry to be a Negative Nancy here. I'm open to being persuaded, but in the past we've made the argument that people would be more active if we just gave them better titles and ... I doubt that's the case.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

***Roavin*** · 12-16-2019, 05:56 AM

I like Somy's proposal overall.

I also like the idea of a separate media minister. Again, having a dedicated mandate might help to get media rolling.

I also like Amerion's suggestion to make the precise setup of ministers part of a separate act. In addition to that, I'd suggest changing the RO act to not necessarily mandate specific slots for specific ministers, but rather to give the Cabinet as a whole up to N slots that they may assign as they please (sans BC RO).

(12-15-2019, 10:58 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: First, where are we getting people to (competitively) run for these positions?

We have like 60ish Legislators, and having more positions that are not as daunting a job as MoRA would help, I think.

(12-15-2019, 10:58 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Second, we've yet to have a sustained WA Advisor let alone making it a Cabinet position. If CS is doing it — great — but let's just appoint him as WA advisor and be done with it.

We could do that, but we've done that before, and they never stuck around. By putting a MoWA into law, we the assembly are basically saying that we want this to be a permanent thing.

(12-15-2019, 10:58 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Third, Home Affairs seems ... redundant and like it would step on the toes of the LC. And, we rarely have someone who is active enough offsite and still integrated in the RMB community to make this feasible. Finally, I think this would be a huge step back from RMB voting and governance.

That's true, and that concerns me as well. I'm somewhat split on this. On the one side, I love the idea of sovereign RMB-side governance and whatnot, but on the other hand I've recently come to think that our (successful) efforts of doing this over the past 3-4 years has led to less integration to the forum side of things than there would otherwise be.

It's something to really think about a lot, but I think a compromise can be found. I'd love to hear from our Legislator-LCers on this.

(12-15-2019, 10:58 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Finally, I've always been skeptical of a Minister of Media since ... in a lot of ways it's a minister of propaganda (imo). Although, considering we don't have an active independent press, it might be useful ...

Nothing wrong with propaganda > Smile

(12-15-2019, 10:58 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Anyhow. Sorry to be a Negative Nancy here. I'm open to being persuaded, but in the past we've made the argument that people would be more active if we just gave them better titles and ... I doubt that's the case.

No need to be sorry! Assembly debate is good, this is healthy.

So, from my perspective, it's not about giving people better titles and hoping that they do things, it's rather just (kinda as I said above) the Assembly saying "we want somebody to do X" and creating a mandate for it, so that people that feel the call can then step up to the plate and do the thing. Maybe badge hunting will be a motivation for some (that's always the case) but inevitably there will always be somebody passionate about something.

And again, splitting up the most daunting ministry into easier-to-manage chunks should also help with people daring to run, I'd think.

***Kris Kringle*** · 12-16-2019, 09:13 AM

I’ll just say for the record that the South Pacific has explicitly avoided using its state news media for propaganda, and that is a proud practice that should continue. It’s perfectly fine for government institutions to engage in promotion, but media itself should remain unbiased and free for all viewpoints.

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

(This post was last modified: 12-16-2019, 09:13 AM by Kris Kringle.)

***Tsunamy*** · 12-16-2019, 09:51 AM

(12-16-2019, 09:13 AM)Kris Kringle Wrote: I’ll just say for the record that the South Pacific has explicitly avoided using its state news media for propaganda, and that is a proud practice that should continue. It’s perfectly fine for government institutions to engage in promotion, but media itself should remain unbiased and free for all viewpoints.

I should say when I say "propaganda" I use the term pretty loosely and I don't think a Minister of the Media would be "propaganda" anymore than our various news outlets now are. My preferred option would be still a completely independent press, but ... I doubt that's going to happen.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

The Sakhalinsk Empire · 12-16-2019, 10:25 AM

(12-16-2019, 05:56 AM)Roavin Wrote:
(12-15-2019, 10:58 AM)Tsunamy Wrote: Third, Home Affairs seems ... redundant and like it would step on the toes of the LC. And, we rarely have someone who is active enough offsite and still integrated in the RMB community to make this feasible. Finally, I think this would be a huge step back from RMB voting and governance.

That's true, and that concerns me as well. I'm somewhat split on this. On the one side, I love the idea of sovereign RMB-side governance and whatnot, but on the other hand I've recently come to think that our (successful) efforts of doing this over the past 3-4 years has led to less integration to the forum side of things than there would otherwise be.

It's something to really think about a lot, but I think a compromise can be found. I'd love to hear from our Legislator-LCers on this.

Many people who would otherwise be participating in the government are barred from entering the forums or Discord (such as myself) for one reason or another. If we want the government to be more active, especially on the Regional Affairs side, participation in the government needs to be more accessible for gameside nations.

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

**Belschaft** · 12-16-2019, 02:29 PM

You can’t legislate activity into existence - if there is something that people think should be happening (ie; Media, WA, etc) and no one is stepping up to the plate currently, then creating a Cabinet post to be in charge of it won’t magically conjure up someone to do it. At best you’ll get someone doing a piss poor job because they ran for the post because they wanted to be in Cabinet but with minimal actual interest in that role

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

PREVIOUS ROLES

***Tsunamy*** · 12-16-2019, 03:25 PM

(12-16-2019, 02:29 PM)Belschaft Wrote: You can’t legislate activity into existence - if there is something that people think should be happening (ie; Media, WA, etc) and no one is stepping up to the plate currently, then creating a Cabinet post to be in charge of it won’t magically conjure up someone to do it. At best you’ll get someone doing a piss poor job because they ran for the post because they wanted to be in Cabinet but with minimal actual interest in that role

So, obviously, I'm in agreement here (and have said as much), but, I don't quite think that's the proposal. Or, at least, that's not what the proposal is attempting is rectify.

If the issue is that we're trying to find more ways to get people involved (someone correct me if I'm wrong?) I can see how this would be a good thing if a smaller role and perhaps more specific roles would encourage people to run. I mean, personally, I'd run for Minister of Media, but have always had zero interest in RA at large.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

**Belschaft** · 12-16-2019, 04:00 PM

(12-16-2019, 03:25 PM)Tsunamy Wrote:
(12-16-2019, 02:29 PM)Belschaft Wrote: You can’t legislate activity into existence - if there is something that people think should be happening (ie; Media, WA, etc) and no one is stepping up to the plate currently, then creating a Cabinet post to be in charge of it won’t magically conjure up someone to do it. At best you’ll get someone doing a piss poor job because they ran for the post because they wanted to be in Cabinet but with minimal actual interest in that role

So, obviously, I'm in agreement here (and have said as much), but, I don't quite think that's the proposal. Or, at least, that's not what the proposal is attempting is rectify.

If the issue is that we're trying to find more ways to get people involved (someone correct me if I'm wrong?) I can see how this would be a good thing if a smaller role and perhaps more specific roles would encourage people to run. I mean, personally, I'd run for Minister of Media, but have always had zero interest in RA at large.

But why do we need a cabinet post called Minister of Media? What is stopping someone who wants to do media work from starting a newspaper or resurrecting an existing one like SPINN?

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

PREVIOUS ROLES

***Tsunamy*** · 12-16-2019, 04:58 PM

(12-16-2019, 04:00 PM)Belschaft Wrote:
(12-16-2019, 03:25 PM)Tsunamy Wrote:
(12-16-2019, 02:29 PM)Belschaft Wrote: You can’t legislate activity into existence - if there is something that people think should be happening (ie; Media, WA, etc) and no one is stepping up to the plate currently, then creating a Cabinet post to be in charge of it won’t magically conjure up someone to do it. At best you’ll get someone doing a piss poor job because they ran for the post because they wanted to be in Cabinet but with minimal actual interest in that role

So, obviously, I'm in agreement here (and have said as much), but, I don't quite think that's the proposal. Or, at least, that's not what the proposal is attempting is rectify.

If the issue is that we're trying to find more ways to get people involved (someone correct me if I'm wrong?) I can see how this would be a good thing if a smaller role and perhaps more specific roles would encourage people to run. I mean, personally, I'd run for Minister of Media, but have always had zero interest in RA at large.

But why do we need a cabinet post called Minister of Media? What is stopping someone who wants to do media work from starting a newspaper or resurrecting an existing one like SPINN?

... I'm spitballing here because I wasn't involved in this conversation, but I'm assuming it would be a bit broader than just the newspaper?

And, to your question, (1) doesn't the RA still produce a paper, and (2) if not, I suspect new nations might not know that's a way to get involved. While things have certainly changed in the intervening years, but I took over the SPIN (one 'n') because the delegate publicized the need.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

**Amerion** · 12-17-2019, 03:00 AM

(12-16-2019, 03:25 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: ...

If the issue is that we're trying to find more ways to get people involved (someone correct me if I'm wrong?) I can see how this would be a good thing if a smaller role and perhaps more specific roles would encourage people to run. I mean, personally, I'd run for Minister of Media, but have always had zero interest in RA at large.

Likewise. I think there is a strong case to be made that there are individuals who may not wish to involve themselves in a huge ministry like RA but would like to run a media organisation.

In any event, given that there are communication portfolios in other GCRs (TNP, TEP, and TRR come to mind), I believe this isn't a particularly radical move.

(This post was last modified: 12-17-2019, 03:01 AM by Amerion.)