punkdaddy

Updating now....locking for the time being. EDIT: The list has now been updated. If you find that you were removed and shouldn't have, please post your TWP nation below and I will add you to the list and you will be able to vote in the current election. New nations applying after this post will not be allowed to vote in the current Advocate election.

Since I have been "back" much has gone on. But more would have gone on if URAP hadn't short circuited things. This place was pretty dead prior to me being back. This place has 1000 percent more activity. But deflection is one of your noted skills. I would still love an answer beyond, "i'm fairly active" to my question. I don't ask this question in malice or with ill intent. I was asking to see if I felt confident enough to remove myself from the race knowing you could do both jobs. Instead you took the opportunity to take pot shots at me. If your aim was to win, this hampers those efforts because I am no less convinced now than when I asked the question about your activity. And it would not have taken much to assuage me. Sometimes a question is just a question.

The answer to the question of your job is that the 3 of us should meet on a regular basis to put forth a unified foreign agenda. Typically, i wouldn't even post what i'm posting now for public consumption, but I can't stress enough the importance of being on the same page. We all look silly when we're not and actively involving our delegate is key.

There is quite a bit going on behind the scenes. My activity levels, though, have nothing to do with yours.

no you do not. I am going to need to keep the noms open until 6pm US EST. The reason is I won't have time until to update the membership list of the Voice. Worked till about 10PM last night (unexpected) and I have a poker tournament tonight (expected). Common Sense says no one needs to reapply to be Voice members. I like Common Sense, good guy. I'm glad to see we have a number of candidates for the position of Advocate. That is good.

I would like to not run, to be honest. I do, however, have concerns that the player behind TP's delegate and Vlagh are the same from a time committment standpoint. The Advocate we need really will need to be hands on and I'm not sure you can fulfill both duties at 100% capacity.

Malviet. Elegarth has a say in the off-site and on-site. Other Advocates may feel differently, but our foreign policy will be in tandem with the delegate. Your note is going to be extremely confusing, I'm afraid. Foreign policy cannot be run without the delegate. Can it be run without the Advocate or DA of FA, you bet it can. As such we need to work with and not work outside the delegate, imo.

I was thinking of using North Pacific's Spy's tactic. I will update the list prior to the start of the election. I tend to be fair and won't mind delegating this if people think it's unfair and that i'm biased as a candidate. Let's not let this derail us as it's procedural and we can get through it. I will make my best attempt to get the list updated before my head hits the pillow tonight.

Rats...I mean...Yay, Malviet has declined. I'll accept my nomination.

We're a little behind on this but I am opening Advocate candidacy declarations per: This thread will stay open for 3 days. You must be a continuous member of the Voice for at least a month to be recognized as a candidate.

I actually think the only problem was URAP. That has been corrected and we're back to business. One can argue that the off-site activity is a problem, but I still maintain we should try an on-site only solution. We keep trying to fix a problem (off-site activity) without understanding why it exists in the first place. And without understanding the problem, you can't recommend a solution that will work, imo.

As worded, the Advocate is both. Mind you, I'd love a "Speaker of the House" role to focus on running the government versus running the legislature but that's a matter of style I guess. I would prefer a system where each Advocate was able to create their own rules for the legislature versus putting in a system. Keep it flexible for incoming advocates.

Bump

You can imagine how it was bugging me. Worked 20% of the time.

He's back folks!!! Woo hoo!!

I think this is a settled issue, but if people have other thoughts on the matter that's fine.

I've not know Cormac to be a liar. He's got some wacky reasoning, imo, but generally he says what he actually believes.

This fall was so hard and so fast. Wow. That's the part that gets me the most.

We'll get on this.

Vlagh I think you see the URAP failing as the system failing. Those are two different things. I also think you see a delegate failing as the system failing. Again, those are separate in TWP. The one thing I have liked about TWP is that the delegate chair itself while having the most authority wasn't something we (the Guardians) wanted to have as a rotation of the elite. Instead we did want newer folks in the chair (Enlightened Defenders) and people who hadn't been delegate before (Yy4u). That's the difference between TP and TWP in my opinion and one isn't better than another, it's just that within this system we're willing to risk a bad delegate in order for the system we have established to continue. Elu - thanks for the comment on Flem. I'm shocked. I also think that TWP has proved influential in many ways b/c the system has worked for so long. I mean, I might chide the new kids a bit but the Guardians enabled us to retake the region fairly quickly. So I'll agree with AGP that URAP failed and the system showed how strong it is and needs to continue being. Addendum: Thinking further, Vlagh in your paradigm if the delegate fails the system fails. This could be true in TP (i'm not an officionado on that one) but in TWP we've built a system that will continue should a delegate fail precisely because delegates can fail. We haven't had something like this in TWP in probably a decade but even so this lasted an update, maybe two. That's not a failing system in my opinion.

Check this out. http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=354584 see Cormac's comments.

I concur with this. He took deliberate and public actions to undermine our system. There should be repercussions in my opinion.

Sad and swift fall.

Elegarth nudged me that we will need Advocate elections. I'm fulfilling the term Elegarth began. I think, if my timing is correct elections should be started in the next week to begin the next term. Give me a few days and we will open the process no later than Monday. This is just a head's up for those interested in running. I plan to run again as I want to see us set up on the right foot after this whole debacle but I encourage anyone interested in running to run. I'm going to lock this thread down, but if you're interested in running check the charter for the particulars and at worst I'll open things up Monday.

Guardians chosen by popularity is a bad move. I don't want TNP's system here. I know TNP's system well, I'm currently a court justice and admin on TNP's boards. I'm probably the best (I'll put Vlagh as a distant second) person to compare the two systems. TWP has a system of trust and providing new people and opportunity to prove themselves. TNPs system has a trust component to it but it's much more fluid in terms of who comes and goes in the TNP Security Council. Yes some members have been there for ages, Flem/Grosse/GBM but others are very new. The level of trust needed to get on the SC is different than the Guardians, imo. As for in-game and off-site separation that really makes us unique, strong, and not victim to many characterizations of delegates such as "this delegate doesn't have the right to be delegate because of X". Nope, game mechanics settle the delegate and if you want to change a delegate use game mechanics to do it. Thus URA as Cormac is the legit TWP del right now. However, we put Guardians in place to protect us should a delegate wish to move the region in a direction that is bad for the community. Guardians are soldiers really and right now we need them, but we are well prepared for this.