Users browsing this thread:

moe · 05-21-2021, 12:57 PM

(05-21-2021, 01:34 AM)Moonstar Wrote: I don't agree with this because people are inherently lazy. Even if we are not trying to be, our real lives and burnout can appear at any given time in addition. Time and time again, in every single region with activity we see people take up post and can do the bare minimum. Those who go full throttle are either younger new trailblazers who throw themselves into things (Phoenix and Hyacinth are good examples) or they're people who are really good at doing what they do and getting it done (which not all of us are fortunate to have the same level of skill and drive).

That's just one person in one position. I will admit I am jaded here, but over a decade does that to you. When I see people have same level positions in culture for example or at least a part of cultural teams, they'll recycle the same stuff between regions. It's the easy way out. I am not saying it's inherently bad, but it's not innovative. It stagnates creativity. So I do not believe in exemption.

Sure, I think that's a fair counterargument; I try to "see the best" in people but it's entirely possible you may have had different experiences in the past. Personally, I don't think there's particular harm in someone reusing the same idea if they happen to hold the same job in multiple regions, I think it could be beneficial, but I'm also aware that there may be things like time/burnout that can play a factor.

Tishers [Nyxonia] · 05-21-2021, 08:41 PM

Could the end-goal still be served by a statement from any candidate for office that they will abstain from making any decision or casting any vote that might put them in a conflict of interest with TSP and any other region?

In reality many of these tiny regions are boutique in nature and do not have much interaction with TSP at all. There may also be some not-openly-discussed strategic decision on why someone holds a position in another region and that should be discussed in a private executive session of the primary office holders.

As legislators it would be nice to know everything, but it is not as if there is some sort of background check for anyone to belong to government. As a defender/ anti-fas region there will always be things that we find out about after the fact so we should still get a bit of a debrief in an after-action report.

Trust is earned, it takes time. I know that on the scale of time and involvement in TSP I am super-new and for all any of you know I am some deep plant from TBH (joking, here entirely for my own reasons, I do not even visit other RMB's).

Tisha
Minister of Engagement
Legislator
Coral Guard
Ambassador to South Pacific region
OWL senior staff

Tishers ?☢ [Nyxonia]

LEDA #1 June, July, August, September 2021
COB #10 April, May 2021
Wingspan #10 August, September 2021

"I am an endorsin fool"

Damination · 05-21-2021, 10:15 PM

(05-21-2021, 08:41 PM)An Inanna Wrote: As legislators it would be nice to know everything, but it is not as if there is some sort of background check for anyone to belong to government.

I can speak as LegComm, that with becoming a legislator the applicant gets a background check. For new nations, there isn't a lot of info to go on and for well known older nations usually we know most things about them. We still look for whatever we can. Anyone making it to Legislator is already good or isn't suspicious enough. I can't speak for the CRS since I don't know how they work internally.

In any case, everyone goes through this process at least once. Though information can change over time, this is normally where CoI information comes into play.