What follows are logs from the FAC chat. Black Widow is Jay, the other two of us should be obvious.

What are the Cabinet's thoughts on how to proceed as a government with Commend Imki and OWL? Obviously we're put in a precarious spot because not all of us agree and the regional history with Imki.

[8:18 PM] Black Widow: On another issue, Wisch asked me for TSP's thoughts on Commend Imki, and there's a discussion on whether to issue a PfS recommendation. They're aware that we're divided internally on this issue, and I have half the mind to ask for a Cabinet override on the OWL to state that no recommendation or abstain will be issued for it.(edited)
[8:49 PM] WS got deja vu.: yeah it might be best to ask for an override so there's no recommendation
[9:16 PM] HumanSanity: What interest does it serve to override for abstain?
[9:16 PM] HumanSanity: Like why interfere with the OWL vote?
[9:17 PM] HumanSanity: I’m not opposed just don’t get the argument
[9:21 PM] Black Widow: Imki has a controversial past in TSP, given their role in one of the past coups.
[9:25 PM] HumanSanity: I know that.
[9:25 PM] HumanSanity: Why should we intervene to Abstain instead of letting voters decide? What interest does that serve?
[9:33 PM] HumanSanity: My point is just I think of overrides as being for FA/security interests and I don’t think we have one in not taking whatever position the people of the region decide(edited)
[9:37 PM] WS got deja vu.: I’m not saying abstain. I’m saying OWL should not give a recommendation and voters should decide.
[9:39 PM] HumanSanity: OWL releases the recommendation based on a vote
[9:40 PM] Black Widow: Sure, people can vote whichever way they want, but the delegate casting nearly 700 votes either way is not one that I'm prepared to support, especially when the majority of the people who typically vote in the OWL have very little awareness or knowledge about Imki's past in TSP.
[9:48 PM] HumanSanity: Which one of our allies, or what security vulnerability, is related to this? Arguably, we could just set an against recommendation because she couped TSP. But, I don’t think there’s consensus in the region on that? I’m under informed about the whole thing and personally was planning to abstain, but I don’t understand why the government shouldn’t let people decide since there’s clearly no consensus on how that should effect the question of her Commend, which is what the vote is actually about. Aside from that, no relationship with or interests of an important ally is affected by voting either way or not voting at all.
[9:50 PM] Black Widow: We're talking about a person who couped the region. What question about security is there? Personally, I would have pursued an against override, but I know that that would be a divided Cabinet decision itself.
[9:56 PM] HumanSanity: The fact that it is a divided decision among the Cabinet itself does not mean the Cabinet should decide for the region. Clearly there are multiple perspectives in the region about her commendability. Doesn’t mean we should abstain because people disagree.
[9:57 PM] HumanSanity: Do we need to discuss this with the whole cabinet?
[9:57 PM] WS got deja vu.: yeah, and I’ve spoken openly in favor of it. Maybe better to bring to the whole cabinet
[9:58 PM] Black Widow: Yes, I think we could make a thread and share the preceding conversation.

 
Witchcraft and Sorcery

---

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

Reply

Wew okay. So, to reiterate, OWL gives recommendations based on the votes of the people who turn in the OWL RMB during voting times. You can technically say that it sets the recommendation for the region, but a more accurate perspective on the subject is that it represents the opinion of all voters who have shown up in the thread to provide feedback. A number of those voters can be (and have been) members of government and members of cabinet.

So, the request is to pre-emptively override that process on the grounds that the cabinet does not trust whatever outcome it would be. For, as of right now, there is not even an open vote on this subject.

I would like to echo HS' concerns about what matters of regional security we believe this commendation poses. If we believe that Imki is a threat to the region, we should probably remove her from our discord server. Otherwise, it's not clear to me what critical issue OWL acting according to its established procedures poses.

I'd like some clarification from the Foreign Affairs minister about what he would like the effect to be. As the logs indicate to me that he is interested in either blocking a recommendation being issued or blocking the delegate from voting affirmatively. Those are two very different things. In no uncertain terms, I do not support an Against override at this time.

(This post was last modified: 07-07-2021, 11:44 PM by Luca.)

Reply

I certainly don't see Imki as any kind of security threat to the region. If at any point she were she would have been banned, but seeing as she's been a member of our server for the entirety of the five years since the Hileville coup, and has served in government successfully since then, I strongly oppose the notion that she's a security threat.

I just want the people to decide. I think they should be informed, but the people should decide without any kind of influence from government. I personally am in favor, but I know that opinion is not shared by all and out of deference to them given history, I'm doing my best to have us as a government and our related institutions give the subject as wide a berth as possible.

My problem with the situation at hand and informing the people about history is that there really isn't an unbiased account of what happened. There are a ton of facts in dispute and there would be hurt feelings either way. I want the government to be as neutral as possible on the matter and let the people decide.

 
Witchcraft and Sorcery

---

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

(This post was last modified: 07-07-2021, 11:52 PM by Witchcraft and Sorcery.)

Reply

I would like to echo HS' concerns about what matters of regional security we believe this commendation poses. If we believe that Imki is a threat to the region, we should probably remove her from our discord server. Otherwise, it's not clear to me what critical issue OWL acting according to its established procedures poses.

I'd like some clarification from the Foreign Affairs minister about what he would like the effect to be. As the logs indicate to me that he is interested in either blocking a recommendation being issued or blocking the delegate from voting affirmatively. Those are two very different things. In no uncertain terms, I do not support an Against override at this time.

First, I have doubts that there will even be a vote in the OWL given the inconsistency of putting WA proposals up for a vote as of late, and second, the proposal will be up for a vote on the SC floor in an hour or so. For all intents and purposes, we're gonna be leaving the delegate's vote open to an up-and-down vote among TSP WA nations without any room to justify such votes, and the delegate will cast their vote accordingly giving 680 votes one direction or another.

As for the security issue surrounding this vote, what message does it send when our delegate casts their vote for commending a person who was part of a coup against our region? That is the issue. We shouldn't send the message that someone can coup the region and get commended later.

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

My History

Reply

I would like to echo HS' concerns about what matters of regional security we believe this commendation poses. If we believe that Imki is a threat to the region, we should probably remove her from our discord server. Otherwise, it's not clear to me what critical issue OWL acting according to its established procedures poses.

I'd like some clarification from the Foreign Affairs minister about what he would like the effect to be. As the logs indicate to me that he is interested in either blocking a recommendation being issued or blocking the delegate from voting affirmatively. Those are two very different things. In no uncertain terms, I do not support an Against override at this time.

First, I have doubts that there will even be a vote in the OWL given the inconsistency of putting WA proposals up for a vote as of late, and second, the proposal will be up for a vote on the SC floor in an hour or so. For all intents and purposes, we're gonna be leaving the delegate's vote open to an up-and-down vote among TSP WA nations without any room to justify such votes, and the delegate will cast their vote accordingly giving 680 votes one direction or another.

As for the security issue surrounding this vote, what message does it send when our delegate casts their vote for commending a person who was part of a coup against our region? That is the issue. We shouldn't send the message that someone can coup the region and get commended later.

If Imki has successfully served in government since the Hileville coup, we don't really have a justification to act with the political indignation as though she were banned or blacklisted from the South. If we have been comfortable enough having her here and having her in government since then, there's no rationale to suddenly regress to a time where that future would have been in question. It is past the point of being appropriate at this stage. I much more suspect that this is in relation to a certain member of the CRS having a rather public and politically damaging tantrum on the SC forum and #legislators-lounge recently. I don't wish to indulge that or its chilling effect for members giving their private opinions.

I agree with W&S that the posture of the region should be left to the voters and the arguments they give. This can include your arguments as well, the perspective you have, etc. But you cannot compel people to feel a certain way when they do not, and the government should certainly not take authoritarian action to represent a scant few players who have clung to power in this region for a decade in lieu of actual trending opinion.

If you have concerns about OWL being incompetent or unable to carry out its normal functions, then we should absolutely discuss replacing the OWL director or directing them to replace senior staff so that the Office can carry out its vital work. Any vote going under the radar or slipping through the cracks is something I feel is unacceptable, and if we're running into a situation where ordinary OWL business can burn people out of interest in working in this department, thought should be given to reform. The solution to that concern, however, is not to instruct it on how to vote, but to snap it into functionality at large.

Reply

First, I have doubts that there will even be a vote in the OWL given the inconsistency of putting WA proposals up for a vote as of late, and second, the proposal will be up for a vote on the SC floor in an hour or so. For all intents and purposes, we're gonna be leaving the delegate's vote open to an up-and-down vote among TSP WA nations without any room to justify such votes, and the delegate will cast their vote accordingly giving 680 votes one direction or another.

This is the most persuasive argument, to me, so far. OWL as a platform gives a pathway to a clear back and forth where all sides present their arguments and can interact and discuss with one another and then decide. The vote of the WA nations of TSP does not, and that introduces a concern about miseducated or misinformed voters. I guess I can see that argument and the concern it results in a "bad" sample. However, I don't think that vote would be binding and the final TSP Delegate vote.

Specifically, I interpret the World Assembly Act differently. In my read, 1(1) states OWL sets the Delegate's initial vote and then if the region votes another way, the Delegate and OWL can make a decision about which to honor. Therefore, the OWL vote would likely still be honored. OWL's dysfunction has blown the ability to stack or stomp either way, but OWL should still vote.

(As an aside, to limit the damage, if we decide to not override in favor of 'no recommendation', we should do the footwork to ensure OWL gets the vote out ASAP. Long term, this is a structural issue with OWL that needs to be fixed, one way or another and with discussion in another (possibly public to get more voices) thread. Also, should probably ping Beepee to make sure they don't vote on their own until we've resolved this question.)

As for the security issue surrounding this vote, what message does it send when our delegate casts their vote for commending a person who was part of a coup against our region? That is the issue. We shouldn't send the message that someone can coup the region and get commended later.

I think there's several ways to slice the question of what it means to vote for any given proposal. Couping our legitimate government is wrong, and I honestly don't begrudge the very realpolitik perspective that "if you coup us, we're against you and everything you do, bye" (however, I think that, in a democracy, the public should get to decide if that is their choice on how to frame the question of how we relate to our history). Arguably, she's Commendable but not for TSP/SPSF content. Arguably, she's Commendable but this resolution is written like garbage. Arguably, she's Commendable but some part of the explanation of the history of Lazarus is wrong or there's some factual detail. I think all of those discussions can be had reasonably and with full loyal integrity to the Coalition and its legitimate government. Context is also a part of these things: this proposal is not an attack on TSP, it comes from Debussy who is a Lazarene to the core with no particular love or disdain for TSP, someone who believes Imki did well for Lazarus, and included a bit about TSP because he believed it was a significant part of Imki's history.

To me, a Cabinet override is used if (1) something changes during the course of the vote about the fundamental facts and a fast decision needs to be made (e.g. a Liberation becomes no longer necessary); (2) an ally requests it and the Cabinet believes our faith to that alliance, which the Assembly has entrusted the MoFA to manage, in this specific case is significant enough to override the vote; or (3) there is a credible belief that voting a certain way will present immediate consequences to the security of the region which the general public is unable to assess due to lack of access to information or foreign interference. In this case, I don't believe any condition is satisfied. Arguably, condition (3) is satisfied because of Imki's role in a coup of the Coalition, but I both do not believe voting for this (if that is what OWL decided) would cause or encourage a specific scenario for the destabilization of the Coalition and I do not believe the Cabinet has more privileged access to information about that determination than the general public, nor do I believe foreign actors are tampering with any potential vote or with public opinion.

Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces
Ambassador to Balder
Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense

(This post was last modified: 07-08-2021, 12:56 AM by HumanSanity.)

Reply

What’s our timeline for wanting/needing to get this discussion resolved?

Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces
Ambassador to Balder
Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense

Reply

my current thought is "do nothing, don't intervene" and let the people decide. Not sure what past that.

 
Witchcraft and Sorcery

---

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

Reply

I personally agree with that but am unsure, since there's a disagreement within the Cabinet that doesn't seem resolvable, if we need to vote or something to decide. I just don't want to circumvent how the process is supposed to work.

Do we want to prompt OWL to get this vote up ASAP if, indeed, our course of action is "OWL do OWL" or do we want to let things move on at OWL's pace?

Additionally, I think within a week we need to have very serious conversations about what OWL is (or rather, is not) doing and how we're going to get that on the right track.

Minister of Foreign Affairs
General of the South Pacific Special Forces
Ambassador to Balder
Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense

Reply

yeah I think with anjo being on leave there's some activity issues there. Kind of the same issues we're having with the home ministries. A lot of these things were dependent on one or two people. Probably needs to be a conversation with anjo and others.

EDIT: and i'd like OWL to get this vote up quickly but it doesn't seem to have happened at all. There's no movement.

 
Witchcraft and Sorcery

---

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

(This post was last modified: 07-08-2021, 02:04 PM by Witchcraft and Sorcery.)

Reply