Fujai

[DISCUSSION] Amendment to the Manners - Citizenship and Activity

Recommended Posts

(Primary changes are in green, subsequent ones are in blue) First, I would like to discuss clarifying the section of the Manners on citizenship as such:

Quote

1. All residents of The West Pacific will have the right to citizenship providing that they apply and are accepted on the off-site forum, maintain a nation in The West Pacific, and satisfy one of the following three requirements: a) Maintain a World Assembly (WA) member nation in TWP which endorses the Delegate. b) Maintain a WA nation in another region and disclose that nation. c) Maintain a WA nation in TWPAF or a foreign military and disclose that foreign military. A citizen will be in good standing if they maintain citizenship and post at least once per month in the off-site forum; all government officials are expected to be continuously active in their jurisdictions. The Ministry of Recruitment and Citizenry will oversee the citizenship process, with all applications subject to the Delegate's approval.

This simply codifies R&C's enforcement of citizenship and removes the oath in favor of a simple application and acceptance. As a community we don't need to extract an oath from our residents, who are already active and involved. It only serves as a further gatekeeping measure that does nothing to help the region.

I would also be interested in discussion on removing the citizenship process altogether in favor of something with even fewer hoops to jump through. Ultimately this is a question of how to promote activity in the region.


The next sections I would like to discuss adding are under the ministries:

Quote

4. Any minister may appoint assistants as needed to fulfill the duties of the position. Officials in any part of the government are expected to be continuously active in their position and jurisdiction. If an official fails to maintain activity or for any reason cannot maintain activity, a replacement or solution must be found, whether temporary or permanent. The Ministry of Recruitment and Citizenry Speaker will monitor governmental activity and report their findings to the Delegate for final decisions.

Quote

7. The Ministry of Recruitment and Citizenry will reach out to residents of The West Pacific to encourage them to become citizens, participate in the military, newspaper, ambassadorial corps, and other governmental activities. The Ministry will oversee and keep statistics of citizenship, recruitment, and governmental activities.

This codifies some things @Westwind mentioned in Dark's "I have an idea!" thread here. There may be a better way of encouraging governmental activity than through legislation, but this is one route that ensures consequences for inactivity and provides framework for what a functioning government should do. This could also fairly easily go under someone else's purview, and perhaps it should, but that is up for discussion.

Also, does something like this even need to be put into the Manners, or should it be a standalone law? There's not really any guidance on that in the Manners or in the Etiquette. If we make amendments to the Manners for everything, it'll soon become encumbered by added length and revision. There are plenty of other things the Hall should take care of, like reviving the attempt for a criminal and civil code, perhaps to replace the gameside Code of Conduct, giving purpose to the Speakership, and other laws regulating the smooth functioning of our regional government. The Hall should also be place where general opinions on West Pacifican policy should be discussed, perhaps in a devoted discussion subforum/thread. I digress, but there should still be discussions on the use of the Hall if we're to increase its relevance.

Edited by Fujai
Colored edits, added second round of edits

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ark said:

Sorry, could you clarify the edits with green or red text? It’s hard to go back and forth between this thread and the Manners every time I want to see what has been edited. 

Oops! Forgot to do that, its all fixed now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Fujai said:

As a community we don't need to extract an oath from our residents, who are already active and involved. It only serves as a further gatekeeping measure that does nothing to help the region.

I would also be interested in discussion on removing the citizenship process altogether in favor of something with even fewer hoops to jump through. Ultimately this is a question of how to promote activity in the region.

 I’m of the opinion that if you can’t go through the effort of copy-pasting an oath, you’re probably not the kind of player who’s looking to be an active, genuine participant in our region. 

Furthermore, with all due respect: do you realize how much of a nightmare it would be if we threw out citizenship altogether? First of all, citizenship is how we keep accurate records of who is in our region as a member and who is just visiting. Secondly, nixing citizenship means that people wouldn’t even need to visit the offsite forums to get involved in the region, which is a gaping lapse in security, and would put undue stress on other members of the region who are responsible for security (read: delegate and guardians). Security is a vital and delicate part of regional procedure, and as such, should probably left to the security officials in the region. 

28 minutes ago, Fujai said:

Officials in any part of the government are expected to be continuously active in their position and jurisdiction. If an official fails to maintain activity or for any reason cannot maintain activity, a replacement or solution must be found, whether temporary or permanent. The Ministry of Recruitment and Citizenry will monitor governmental activity and report their findings to the Delegate for final decisions.

Bolding was done by me for the purpose of clarification. I like the idea of holding mid-level officials accountable, as they are a vital part of keeping activity high and preventing bureaucratic backlogging in the region (and I know how much we all hate bureaucracy here). However, could you please clarify what the bolded statement entails? It almost sounds like an Internal Affairs type of thing. 

31 minutes ago, Fujai said:

The Ministry will oversee and keep statistics of citizenship, recruitment, and governmental activities.

I like this idea. I see an overall trend in your  post toward empowering the R&C Ministry, which is by no means a bad thing. However, this also poses an interesting question: who watches the watchmen? If R&C is monitoring activity in other parts of the government, that requires R&C itself to be particularly active. How do you make sure this happens? If the ministry fails to maintain activity, who holds it accountable, and how? I’d love to explore this idea and possibly suggest edits to your proposal that account for foreseeable issues. 

Regarding your last paragraph in the OP: I see the Manners as more of a constantly changing and evolving document. Given the nature of our region, I think the Manners are currently as efficient and streamlined as a constitution can be. There is certainly still room to make it longer. As far as the rest, I do believe that each of those issues warrants its own discussion thread and Manners proposal in the future, rather than trying to squish as much discussion and legislation into one thread as possible. I would love to see more discussion on the proposed edits to the Manners here, and I think you are on the right track in terms of encouraging regional participation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Ark said:

 I’m of the opinion that if you can’t go through the effort of copy-pasting an oath, you’re probably not the kind of player who’s looking to be an active, genuine participant in our region. 

Furthermore, with all due respect: do you realize how much of a nightmare it would be if we threw out citizenship altogether? First of all, citizenship is how we keep accurate records of who is in our region as a member and who is just visiting. Secondly, nixing citizenship means that people wouldn’t even need to visit the offsite forums to get involved in the region, which is a gaping lapse in security, and would put undue stress on other members of the region who are responsible for security (read: delegate and guardians). Security is a vital and delicate part of regional procedure, and as such, should probably left to the security officials in the region. 

While copy-pasting an oath is pretty low effort, it still doesn't serve a purpose and is just another hoop to jump through. The idea of loyalty oaths generally leaves a bad taste in my mouth, as I imagine it does others. If someone is going to try to infiltrate our region, a loyalty oath certainly isn't going to give them pause, and I doubt anyone here remembers or puts much weight in what it says. Even if people really want an oath, it can easily be rolled into the application so there's not a two step process.

I do realize the nightmare having no citizenship would cause. To clarify, I wasn't advocating getting rid of it entirely, but brainstorming ways of making it easier, such as using a form or just a streamlined application. The main constraint on that that I see right now is the necessity of making a forum account to apply (though this is certainly a good necessity). I realize that people unwilling to do even this aren't necessarily going to contribute much, but making it an easier process can only help make the government more open and inclusive.

58 minutes ago, Ark said:

However, could you please clarify what the bolded statement entails? It almost sounds like an Internal Affairs type of thing. 

My idea is to have someone, not necessarily R&C, keeping an eye on how active government officials are, from low level officials to the Speaker. They would basically make sure that something is always going on in the ministries and that there's no inactive government officials who need to be prodded/removed. I imagine the Delegate, being the executive, would order the minister to fix it or intercede themself.

I put it under R&C to start because that seems like the most utility focused of the ministries. Internal Affairs to me is more cultural than bureaucracy. I toyed with the idea of giving that power to the Guardians, but I don't know what it would do to their workload. A good alternative is that the Speaker should be in charge of it. The Speaker is directly accountable to the Hall, and the Delegate could easily keep an eye on them. After your comments, I'm leaning more in this direction.

58 minutes ago, Ark said:

I like this idea. I see an overall trend in your  post toward empowering the R&C Ministry, which is by no means a bad thing.

When I was R&C Minister right after it was created, there really wasn't much directive so much as things needed to get done in every direction, so I'm generally a fan of defining and empowering it to serve as both a bridge between the people and the government and between the different areas of government. It generally seems like the most bare bones of the ministries, but with a lot of potential. Towards that, we could later discuss amendments or a law that expands on the purpose and duties of each ministry.

58 minutes ago, Ark said:

Regarding your last paragraph in the OP:

There is something to be said for keeping the Manners shorter, more as a frame, and fleshing out that frame in subsequent legislation. That would be opposed to adding in sentences about who does what here and there, and using other laws to go more in depth. Going that route, a new class of legislation or a new overall law to handle these things may be handy. I don't have a strong opinion either way, but when the Manners were being drafted, simplicity was a great concern so I wanted to bring it up.

The rest of what I said definitely requires its own discussion. To some extent it feels like we gave the Hall a good start and a good framework, but we never really finished thinking about its long-term place in TWP. I want to get some sort of ball rolling to get people thinking about possibilities, so that hopefully we can increase the amount of discussion going on here.

Edited by Fujai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Fujai said:

Even if people really want an oath, it can easily be rolled into the application so there's not a two step process.

This is a good point. 

 

54 minutes ago, Fujai said:

To clarify, I wasn't advocating getting rid of it entirely, but brainstorming ways of making it easier, such as using a form or just a streamlined application.

If I’m not mistaken, it is currently done through a google form. 

 

56 minutes ago, Fujai said:

I put it under R&C to start because that seems like the most utility focused of the ministries. Internal Affairs to me is more cultural than bureaucracy. I toyed with the idea of giving that power to the Guardians, but I don't know what it would do to their workload. A good alternative is that the Speaker should be in charge of it. The Speaker is directly accountable to the Hall, and the Delegate could easily keep an eye on them. After your comments, I'm leaning more in this direction.

I like that we are moving toward some new ideas. Making the speaker responsible for activity checks actually kills two birds with one stone - in that it both makes the Speakership more important and hopefully achieves the accountability you want to see with government officials. 

 

58 minutes ago, Fujai said:

When I was R&C Minister right after it was created, there really wasn't much directive so much as things needed to get done in every direction, so I'm generally a fan of defining and empowering it to serve as both a bridge between the people and the government and between the different areas of government. It generally seems like the most bare bones of the ministries, but with a lot of potential. Towards that, we could later discuss amendments or a law that expands on the purpose and duties of each ministry.

This is very understandable, and I appreciate that you are taking the initiative in trying to expand the usefulness of R&C. 

 

1 hour ago, Fujai said:

The rest of what I said definitely requires its own discussion. To some extent it feels like we gave the Hall a good start and a good framework, but we never really finished thinking about its long-term place in TWP. I want to get some sort of ball rolling to get people thinking about possibilities, so that hopefully we can increase the amount of discussion going on here.

I agree with you 100% here. It’s especially important to promote forum traffic, since the advent of Discord has led to a lot of forums becoming quite inactive. As far as the future of the Manners, I am quite optimistic about it as long we have people like you around in the West Pacific. :twpflag:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a lot of words here.  I read some of them.  

The only thing I saw that gave me a negative reaction was something about a criminal code.  No.  Just no.  If people want to RP criminal proceedings they can go to TNP or TSP.  

It's simple here.  Break ToS or COPS, get banned. Everything else is up to the community to organize and execute. The Delegate and ROs decide things gameside.  

I know that seems like an abrupt response and I apologize for the tone.  I am severely allergic to verbose legislative heavy governments in NS. 

However, I love that your goal is to bring people in to the forum for discussions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see ...

I still like a citizenship oath, and I definitely don't want to get rid of citizenship.

Since citizenship is a fundamental component of The Hall, I do think it is appropriate to address this as an amendment.

I like everything else.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Fujai said:

The Ministry of Recruitment and Citizenry will oversee the citizenship process.

Agree but with the provision that R&C run all cit apps past the Delegate. Fact of life is that there are security developments and issues that Delegates know about that R&C might not. I think that R&C should do the grunt work part of it; keeping the databases up to date and monitoring compliance.

10 hours ago, Fujai said:

This simply codifies R&C's enforcement of citizenship and removes the oath in favor of a simple application and acceptance. As a community we don't need to extract an oath from our residents, who are already active and involved. It only serves as a further gatekeeping measure that does nothing to help the region.

I would also be interested in discussion on removing the citizenship process altogether in favor of something with even fewer hoops to jump through. Ultimately this is a question of how to promote activity in the region.

A simple oath makes it more official. It serves the purpose of the Brown M&M Rider (Google it, kids). Citizenship is a privilege and while the benefits are minimal at the moment, that may change in the future. There are also security reasons for making them register for citizenship.

10 hours ago, Fujai said:

The Ministry of Recruitment and Citizenry will monitor governmental activity and report their findings to the Delegate for final decisions.

No need. The Delegate should be well aware of that. If it is an underling, then the Minister should be in control.

10 hours ago, Fujai said:

The Ministry will oversee and keep statistics of citizenship, recruitment, and governmental activities.

YES

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

14 hours ago, Darkesia said:

There are a lot of words here.  I read some of them.  

The only thing I saw that gave me a negative reaction was something about a criminal code.  No.  Just no.  If people want to RP criminal proceedings they can go to TNP or TSP.  

It's simple here.  Break ToS or COPS, get banned. Everything else is up to the community to organize and execute. The Delegate and ROs decide things gameside.  

I know that seems like an abrupt response and I apologize for the tone.  I am severely allergic to verbose legislative heavy governments in NS. 

However, I love that your goal is to bring people in to the forum for discussions.

I'm not fond of constitutions or litigious proceedings. A straightforward civil code which it applied with or without prejudice works just fine. Wonderful thing to ban and deal with issues,

 

Oaths I'm ambivalent about but I'm a Libertarian at heart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/18/2018 at 1:03 AM, Fujai said:

1. All residents of The West Pacific will have the right to citizenship providing that they apply and are accepted on the off-site forum, maintain a nation in The West Pacific, and satisfy one of the following three requirements: a) Maintain a World Assembly (WA) member nation in TWP which endorses the Delegate. b) Maintain a WA nation in another region and disclose that nation. c) Maintain a WA nation in TWPAF or a foreign military and disclose that foreign military. A citizen will be in good standing if they maintain citizenship and post at least once per month in the off-site forum; all government officials are expected to be continuously active in their jurisdictions. The Ministry of Recruitment and Citizenry will oversee the citizenship process.

Ugh...they're going to make me do work now? :P Jokes aside, will there be a hard-coded time limit or any specific circumstance in which this will be enforced? Like if a person's out for a little while but it's due to something serious and they can verify it, will this be something that's included in the amendment, or will all reports be dealt with on a case-by-case with the Delegate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Dewilands said:

Agree but with the provision that R&C run all cit apps past the Delegate. Fact of life is that there are security developments and issues that Delegates know about that R&C might not.

That can definitely be added, though I expect the Delegate would be in communication with R&C regarding those security developments as they occur.

15 hours ago, Dewilands said:

A simple oath makes it more official. It serves the purpose of the Brown M&M Rider (Google it, kids). Citizenship is a privilege and while the benefits are minimal at the moment, that may change in the future.

A simple telegram from the Minister after application could could make it feel official without making people do two steps and would have the added bonus of opening a direct channel of communication with new members. If we want even more official, the Minister can make a post on the RMB and Discord welcoming new members and increasing the visibility of the Hall.

15 hours ago, Dewilands said:

No need. The Delegate should be well aware of that. If it is an underling, then the Minister should be in control.

I agree that the Delegate should be well aware, but they're only one person and can't keep a constant eye on everyone, nor should they. Going forward, I'm proposing putting the activity checks and oversight under the Speaker, who would submit reports to the Delegate. Doing this increases accountability to and from the Hall, Ministries, Speaker, and Delegate. I'll update the post to reflect that.

1 hour ago, Kawaii said:

Ugh...they're going to make me do work now? :P Jokes aside, will there be a hard-coded time limit or any specific circumstance in which this will be enforced? Like if a person's out for a little while but it's due to something serious and they can verify it, will this be something that's included in the amendment, or will all reports be dealt with on a case-by-case with the Delegate?

Are you wondering about citizenship or government activity? In both cases I would leave those cases up to the discretion of whoever is in charge. A case-by-case method would work best for handling inactivity because there's gonna be a lot of different reasons for inactivity each with a number of solutions. In a similar vein, though, I think there's something to be said for including how often activity reports should be submitted. Ideally my initial thoughts would be weekly. Right now I don't think we have enough activity to fill weekly reports, but activity begets activity, so I think it would be worthwhile.

20 hours ago, Darkesia said:

The only thing I saw that gave me a negative reaction was something about a criminal code.  No.  Just no.  If people want to RP criminal proceedings they can go to TNP or TSP.

I would neither expect nor want that either, I only suggest having the Hall write down in law what we're already doing, which is essentially what the Manners did in the first place. Basically just a way of having a consistent and "official" version of the Code of Conduct.

23 hours ago, Ark said:

I agree with you 100% here. It’s especially important to promote forum traffic, since the advent of Discord has led to a lot of forums becoming quite inactive. As far as the future of the Manners, I am quite optimistic about it as long we have people like you around in the West Pacific. :twpflag:

Discord has definitely had an impact on the forums, but it was only the most recent step in a process, I think. For starters, making sure that governmental planning and communication stays on the forums and promoting them more on the RMB and Discord would go a long way. I tend towards cynicism, so I'm glad you're optimistic about it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites