Fratellnoir

TBRs "success" has been the ability to maintain a high profile in public They have been very effective at appearing to be extremely active whilst not really doing much that has an enduring effect

Noble sentiments but.............. Rather vague What are to be the Militaries objectives? All I see is the same old tired cliches independent, defending and attacking. The only way TWP will make a difference in this arena is if we maintain a force that holds TWPs interests at heart, that projects TWP power. If another regions interests converge with ours then they are welcome to become allies, but if they conflict or oppose our objectives, then they either stand aside or else find themselves in conflict with us. Having a military should not be just a badge, "oh look we've got one of those aren't we a civilized well formed region" it should be a shield to project our principles and ideals, and a tool to achieve our goals. TWPAF should be the REGIONS army, not a plaything for GCR career politicians, or a bargaining tool in interregional power politics between defender/raider/imperialist or whatever pretentious label some Gameplay Guru decides is this month flavour. Respect is earned, not given in this field - most GCR militaries are a joke, and if we are serious about having a meaningful force here in TWP then we have to be prepared to dislodge a few noses in the established order, and draconian measures are needed to bring about a change in the way it conducts itself. If we fail to recognise that fundamental fact, then any attempt to build a West Pacific Military is heading for a disaster of biblical proportions. Fire and brimstone falling from the sky, earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunamis, dogs and cats living together...mass hysteria! If you are not part of the solution then you are part of the problem.

Even thouch I am not that keen on Tom Jones (sorry BBD) I will vote in favour

Any military activity in NS is reliant on the willing participation of those involved. Without at least one supporter no such action can be undertaken - it is therefore probably more democratic than the existing delegate system here insofar as there is no coercion to do so, nor is there any consequence of not participating. As it requires the co-operation of those involved it is imperative that their opinions, aims and desires are considered, rather than barking orders.

I understand fully the WA/Endorsement/Delegate symbiosis It is the only true instrument of "power" in the game - the Guardians. forums, governments etc are all peripherals to that basic premise If I or the other WA's decided that we did not like the way you were running things as delegate then we have the right to endorse an alternative However, like almost every other feeder TWP has adopted the artificial "Guardian" system to prevent any getting "above their station" and upsetting the existing order As the FAQ says: Delegates are elected: if you don't like yours, it's up to you to get her unelected!

Even the voters (WA nations) that put you there? How like a RL politician!

Sorry to keep harping on about this but what about what the region wants? It seems to me that PD would have been better off placing this proposal in the RMB rather than in this forum where, to be honest, the response has been biased towards the negative. Darkesia has already intimated that sooner or later she will be stepping down - a new delegate may be keen to encourage on-site activity and make a clean break with the past. Rather than dismissing the idea because the current administration is not receptive, it might be expedient to look into how it could be implemented if the atmosphere changed, and such a system became a requirement

It saddens me to see that the last quote appears to be alarmingly similar to the responses of The Coalition when the suggestion that the Region should have a say in the running of itself in TSP. I am paraphrasing here but the reaction was along the lines of "if they want to participate then they should join the forums and apply for citizenship" I realise that there is no requirement to jump through the hoops that TSP impose, but nevertheless it is tantamount to saying the same thing PD has put forward a proposal for a mechanism to introduce onsite Regional "Administration" without having to resort to any third party offsite forum It in no way impacts on the in-game mechanism of electing a delegate (endorsements) or indeed on the powers of the delegate. However, rather than embracing the idea of an in-game government (the prime aim of the proposal) and examining what would be required to implement it (how to address "poll tourism" ,who would maintain the factbooks/dispatches etc) the refrain has been "we will not and cannot seek to control the delegate" This, in my opinion misses the point of the original proposal Is seems clear that GCR's are not fertile environments for innovation in this area, preferring to consolidate existing methods rather than act as the vanguard of a new, inclusive way of doing things.

You got me bang to rights gov'nr, I confess its a conspiracy, but they said I could keep me kneecaps if I did what they said

Maybe our Delegate should looking into delegation of duties eh?

'pologies Elgarth

You seem to be contradicting yourself: "This is perhaps the only possible positive outcome / characteristic of this system that I can't argue. It makes sense that it creates the potential for this, but is it REALLY worthy to give it a trial period?" " Co-existence of the separate entities seems to be a conceptual issue for many people lately. If tomorrow Max closes the game, the forum community would still exist " If you truly believe that the forum should not seek to influence events in the region then you cannot argue that such a trial should not go ahead. It would seem that the options to progress an in-game government decided via this method is to either convince the existing Delegate or install a Delegate that is willing to instigate it.

Consider this scenario: A candidate who believes that the decisions about the region should be made by the region, runs for Delegate. Somehow the candidate convinces sufficient WA nations in the region to endorse them, and attains the post. As part of the manifesto they have pledged legislation will in future be conducted via the in-game polling system. A referendum will be held to decide if the Endocap remains a device to maintain security, and whether the Guardian scheme is also to be maintained If the response is in favour then new Guardians will be selected and prior to taking up their post will be ratified by the Region, again by using the polling system. All of these decisions have been made without reference to the forum, which is now redundant and is discarded as being surplus to requirement. How does the forum community, and the existing Guardians, respond?

Sorry Elgarth, but is it your suggestion that, as, ultimately, this forum holds no sway over what does and doesn't occur in the in-game region that any form of government/administration we discuss here is not to consider how the region is run? And Vlagh, if there are to be no restrictions on the Delegate then why do the Guardians exist? If we truly respect that the delegate is the nation with the most endorsements, then the whole endocap system is a manifestation of restricting the delegate

I think it would be timely to remind everybody that Darkesia is NOT the enemy here, she has merely pointed out that any attempt to construct an in game system of government is dependent on the Delegates co-operation.

Actually there would be no reason, or jurisdiction, for any intervention by the forum "government" The "rebellion" would come from the WA's present in the region, exercising their in-game right to remove a Delegate that does not consider the desires, customs and aspirations of the region as a whole. If the region as a whole buys into the concept, any future candidate would be foolhardy not to agree to post such polls. If you want to set the Forum Government up as taking precedence over the in-game mechanics you may be better off joining TSP's Coalition The whole point of an in-game chamber is, in my opinion, to show that political engagement can by handled there rather than through a third party medium

It would not be the first time that FACTS have spooked politicos!

On the subject of in game regional polls, can anyone tell me who said this: With regards to flooding the votes with puppets there is a method which could alleviate the problem If a snapshot of the nations resident in the region is taken before announcing the pool via this little facility, a comparison can be made with the list of voters that participated - any that are not on the first list but on the second could be discarded. Its not a perfect solution, but would at least mean that anyone seeking to rig the polls would have to maintain puppets in the region on the off chance that a snap vote was called If you wanted to go further into the issue of *polling puppets" there are ways of checking activity of nations to determine their true nature As for Darkesia's assertion that "Feeder delegates are ego maniacal power mongers. We don't do subservient. Not in our nature", implying that such a system would not be adopted it is perhaps timely to remind anybody in a position of power (especially and elected post) that they are public servants, not hereditary monarchs.[/size] As the FAQ states "Delegates are elected: if you don't like yours, it's up to you to get her unelected!"

This is exactly why the Gameside needs some chamber to act as the voice of the region. Unlike flo32om, many will not join the forum. By adding a in Game chamber we also add value to the game itself by providing something else that can be done in NS rather than people having to divide their time between forum and region

Although I appreciate the concerns about puppets and possible vote - rigging with them I cannot help feeling this is a red herring in a region the size of a feeder Dependent on the buy-in and participation of the region, the quantity of puppets needed to sway a vote could be prohibative - not perhaps impossible, but a lot of work for very little return in terms of influence

Sup?

Where would this Assembly be convened?

Llamas

Cheers Winni, I didn't want to have to try to recreate this and get the colour/dimensions/layout all wrong Do you have a larger/svg version available or is this the biggest one?

I will also be absent from 10th to 26th of this month In the meantime I have instigated the Palantine programme and trust that the Warlord will oversee things in my absence No doubt I will return to a drastically changed TWP