Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

So, as far as I can tell, most old and new West Pacificans are interested in moving on from the events of this past week. But what does "moving on" exactly mean?

 

I hold no answers to this question. This is what the Voice is for, in my opinion.

 

I feel that TWP is an organic government, open to change when required. Having had a few days to process what has happened in terms of both the Voice and the Delegacy, do members both inside and outside the Voice feel that changes should be made, and if so, what should be reformed? Does the system of governance in TWP need reforms at all?

 

I hope by the end of this open (and frank) discussion, West Pacificans, both new and old, can come together to find a system which works for the region at large.

Posted

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.

Posted

Agree with PD, off-site activity has always been a problem in my years here.

 

On-site solution appeals to more users than an off-site solution ever could.

I have seen it too.

 

I agree with PD, we ought to try an on-site solution first, maybe...on-site activity may spur on off-site activity.

 

×
×
  • Create New...