Jump to content

Eluvatar

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    38

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Eluvatar

    Proposal: Procedural Rules

    in Voice of The West Pacific Union

    Posted

    What it also seems to do is allow the Voice to enter into treaties and wars separate from the Delegate, which is expressly against what the Charter states.

    It can't and doesn't. These procedures are subordinate to the charter.

    That said maybe we're interpreting the Charter slightly differently.

    I understood: "The Voice will, with the approval of the Delegate, have the power to enact, amend, and repeal treaties." to mean that the Voice can propose such changes and the Delegate then approves or denies them. Might you be interpreting that as a requirement for pre-clearance from the Delegate to even vote on a treaty?

    Also, why would a Guardian need to be in the Voice to propose an opposition to the Delegate?

    I was under the impression that except for the Delegate's special roles only a member of the Voice should be able to formally propose actions by the Voice. I don't particularly care for that necessity, personally. If others are fine with not requiring such a Guardian to be a member of the Voice, I'm happy to get rid of it.

    And when you state 'as recognized by them' within that clause are you stating that the Advocate must recognize the Guardian?

    The intent of that language is to allow persons capable of acting on a resolution and generally respected by the region to make such a proposal when the Advocate is unable to, if the community needs it.

    The Charter does not define the Guardians, so to refer to them in this procedure I felt I needed to somehow define them. Defining them as the group recognized by the Delegate, however, would lead to a pretty obvious end-run around the clause.

    It'd be simpler to just remove this language entirely and allow any member of the Voice to propose any resolution, even resolutions of rebellion. Perhaps those could instead have a greater requirement for debate?

    Proposal: Procedural Rules

    in Voice of The West Pacific Union

    Posted

    I don't specify the majorities needed for passage either, because those are in the Charter. This document governs who can formally make what proposals and administer votes and when and how long voting is. It does not govern what it takes for a proposal to pass.

    Resolutions to Rebel under this proposed procedure are under the Voice's power to pass any sort of non-binding resolution as per the Charter. What this document would do is limit who can formally propose resolutions of that nature.

    These procedures would be legally unable to expand the power of the Voice, so I'm not sure how I could possibly have accomplished that in this proposal.

    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.

    I think that we need to have written procedures at least for how voting to dismiss an Advocate works.

    Proposal: Procedural Rules

    in Voice of The West Pacific Union

    Posted

    Changed "Clerk" to "Deputy Advocate" in the proposal.

    Why would we need another position for something that is already a duty of the advocate? Seems an unnecessary slot to be filling over and over...

    At the end of the day, every administrative aspect of the Union is the Advocate's responsibility. That doesn't mean we should expect them to personally do every little thing.

    I really liked when the previous regional assembly could simply pronounce its own rules depending on the reality of the RA... we should go back to that instead of moving to a more bureaucratic system tbh

    Could you show an example of how this worked?

    I'd be happy to rewrite this, I just wrote up something that made sense to me and seemed to map out a process that fits what the community seems to want.

    Proposal: Procedural Rules

    in Voice of The West Pacific Union

    Posted · Edited by Eluvatar

    Seeking to get something going here, and perhaps clarify the concept of Rebellion a little bit. Definitely interested in constructive criticism!

    (Also, let me know if I'm not in the Voice anymore, I'm not sure where to check). Edit: I've been pointed out here.

     

    Procedural Rules of the Voice

    1. Administration of the Voice

    (1) The Advocate and any Deputy Advocates of Legislative Affairs they appoint will administer the Procedural Rules.

    (2) Deputy Advocates of Legislative Affairs will be retained until an election is concluded when the office of Advocate is vacant.

    (3) Deputy Advocates of Legislative Affairs may also hold other offices.

    2. Voting

    (1) Except where otherwise explicitly mandated by the Charter of the Union or these rules, votes of the Voice will last for a three day period.

    (2) Any valid proposal may be seconded by any member of the Voice besides its proponent, and will be voted on no sooner than 24 hours and no later than 72 hours afterward.

    3. Sole Powers

    (1) Any member of the Voice may propose changes to these procedural rules.

    (2) Any member of the Voice may propose any non-binding resolution excepting resolutions of rebellion.

    (3) The Advocate or a Cardinal Guardian as recognized by them who is a member of the Voice may propose a resolution of rebellion against the Delegate.

    (4) Any member of the Voice may propose amendments to the Charter of the Union.

    (5) A vote to amend the Charter of the Union will last for a five day period.

    (6) The Advocate or the Delegate may propose a constitutional convention.

    (7) Any member of the Voice may propose dismissing the Advocate from office, and if no Deputy Advocate of Legislative Affairs is able to bring such a proposal to a vote, a third member of the Voice may administer the vote.

    (8) Any member of the Voice may propose dismissing any official appointed by the Advocate.

    (9) Any member of the Voice may propose changing the name of TWPAF (The West Pacific Armed Forces).

    (10) If the name of TWPAF is changed, these rules will be updated to reflect that change.

    (11) Any member of the Voice may propose the end of any ongoing deployment by TWPAF.

    4. Foreign Relations

    (1) For the purpose of these rules, Union treaties are treates proposed by the Advocate and Delegate treaties are treaties proposed by the Delegate.

    (2) The Advocate will propose the enactment or amendment of Union treaties.

    (3) Any member of the Voice may propose repeal of any Union treaty.

    (3) The Delegate will propose recognition of Delegate treaties and amendments to them.

    (4) Any member of the Voice may propose rescinding recognition of Delegate treaties.

    (5) For the purpose of these rules, Union wars are wars proposed by the Advocate and Delegate wars are wars proposed by the Delegate.

    (6) The Advocate may propose declarations of war.

    (7) Any member of the Voice may propose repeal of any Union war.

    (8) The Delegate may propose declarations of war.

    (9) Any member of the Voice may propose rescinding confirmation of any Delegate war.

    5. Justice

    (1) Any member of the Voice may state a complaint against another member of the Voice.

    (2) Any member of the Voice may propose commuting a sentence imposed in a hearing.

    Edit2: Changed "Clerk" to "Deputy Advocate of Legislative Affairs".

    A public apology

    in Office of The Delegate

    Posted

    Are you referring to Security Council 2.0 in TNP?  Because TNP had a Security Council long before TWP had Guardians.  And I seem to remember the discussion around your amendments not having anything to do with TWP at all, but as a 'home-grown' change to an existing structure to account for the introduction of Influence.  At least that is how it reads on TNP's forum archive thread about it.

     

    I am all for supporting the past and the legacy of TWP, but as with most old regions, we sometimes generate credit for innovation amongst ourselves where none is warranted.

    Security council 2.0 (as you say) was created after the previous Security Council had been abolished for several months.

    The group of people that drafted the initial proposal definitely had TWP on their minds. I should know, I was one of them. Credit should be given of course to The Minister for drafting the revised proposal which was finally palatable to a sufficient consensus in TNP, which was as a result ultimately better, I think, than the original proposal.

    I'd had similar ideas myself, prior to TAO's introduction of the Guardians in TWP, but my thoughts were influenced in their further development by that approach, and the notion of instituting "Guardians" specifically, with the comparison drawn to TWP, was a subject of discussion during the war with the Crimson Order.

    (back to the subject of trust)

    There are of course two different levels of trust to measure: how much guardians trust one another, and how much the regional public does.

    A public apology

    in Office of The Delegate

    Posted

    I would agree that TNP drew inspiration from the Guardians when it introduced its Security Council. It never had them be appointees of the Delegate, however.

     

    Punkdaddy is right that it's a bit more fluid. In fact, Flemingovia isn't TNPSC, even, and never has been.

     

    Current membership:

     

    # Nation Endorsements Offsite Forum Member since 1 Novare Res 511 2004 2 McMasterdonia 0 2012 3 Democatic Donkeys 488 2004 4 Grosseschnauzer 506 2004 5 God n Country n Byron 375 2012* 6 Former English Colony 449 2004 7 Great Bights Mum 359 2003 8 General COE 366 2012 9 Malvad 347 2012 10 SillyString 609 2013** 11 Territorio di Nessuno 424 2014 12 Plembobria 439 2014

     

    *Lord Byron joined the forum in 2012, God N Country N Byron joined the region in 2011.

    **SillyString was registered in 2013, but Astarial had been a part of the IRC community for some time before this

     

    Edit: WTF in my input box that was a pretty table :(

    Ratification Vote: Charter of the Union of the West Pacific

    in Constitutional Convention

    Posted

    Hassan Koury slipped into the voting chamber holding a sheaf of papers. Pulling out a paper he took a deep breath, then, blinking suddenly, put it back and rifled through the sheaf for a few seconds looking sheepish.

     

    Finding the paper he sought, Hassan said, "The Sultanate of El Sock, ah, ratifies the Charter of the Union of the West Pacific."

     

    Having said his piece, he slipped the paper onto the Presiding Officer's desk and briskly ascended to an unoccupied desk. After looking over that first paper carefully for a few seconds, he briskly strode over to the Reçueçn representatives.

     

    "Sirs? I would like to apply for asylum in Reçueçn."

    The Sun Always Rises

    in Archived Threads

    Posted

    Farouq pushed his cart breezily down the alley in the cool twilight before the sunrise. Dodging a tottering trashpile, he emerged onto the street.

     

    Avoiding Ali and his cart, Farouq rushed ahead toward the pierside market. A gull called loudly overhead. A ship's horn sounded from ahead, as though in answer.

     

    There. A stall with only two in line ahead of him. Good, maybe Farouq could make the breakfast rush outside the courthouse.

     

    Farouq peered ahead to the merchant's table. 20 Munnies a kilo? Not the cheapest chickpeas, but he could just about fill the pot at that price.

     

    As he rolled his cart forward to be second in line, Farouq watched the merchant step out from behind the table. Strange. Normally they didn't want to lose any time. Could... He was changing the price.

     

    25?? There was... no way...

     

    * * *

     

     

    Farouq had sold 2 falafel this morning. At this rate, he'd have nothing worth counting tomorrow.

     

    This was it. No way forward. Nothing.

     

    * * *

     

    Abdul needed to stop smoking. Cigarrettes were costing more and more. He couldn't possibly keep buying packs like that, not on a clerk's salary and, ah, tips.

     

    Huh. That was a funny smell. Like a kind of meaty oily smell. A bit stronger than the falafel cart usually... There was a crowd growing around the falafel cart. The falafel cart which was on fire.

     

    The falafel seller who was on fire. And not screaming.

    Ejections

    in Office of The Delegate

    Posted

    I see.

     

    What about:

     

    I'm particularly puzzled by the banning of Benjamin Mark, who is listed as a nation to endorse on the World Factbook Entry as a nation to endorse up to 120...

    Ejections

    in Office of The Delegate

    Posted

    Being somewhat new to The West Pacific, I'm a little lost.

     

    Why:

    I'm just not understanding it.

×
×
  • Create New...