Vote: Plembobria's SC application

Voting on this has closed,

AYE: 4
NAY: 3

The application of Plembobria has achieved quorum and majority approval. The Regional Assembly will be notified forthwith.

Members voting AYE:
Democratic Donkeys
Romanoffia
Great Bights Mum
Malvad

Members voting NAY:
Grosseschnauzer
Crushing Our Enemies
SillyString

Members Not Voting:
Former English Colony
Lord Byron
McMasterdonia

FEC's vote was discounted as it was cast outside the allotted voting period.
 
SillyString:
FEC's vote was discounted as it was cast outside the allotted voting period.
Click to expand...
Two things:

First, I would have allowed the vote, The SC is not the RA. We are an intimate group, and optimally, the VD works to get everyone to weigh in.

Second, differences in handling Internal procedures should be properly sorted out Internally. It's important that the region recognizes us as a team and has confidence in our ability to work together. The issue really should have been discussed here first.
 
Mum, the SC may be a small group, but we still have rules, and they're very clear. In addition, SillyString posted the voting period in the OP - there's nothing really to discuss. I'm not sure how a vote being discounted reflects in any way on our ability to work together. Also, voting procedures are not Internal. They're posted publicly as part of the SC procedures, and votes are held in public.

Personally, I would not like the rest of the region to view us as a body that plays fast and loose with our own rules. Considering that our core mission is to preserve democratic governance, I find your position on this very strange.
 
mmm... the second bit was directed at Schnauzers for his comment in the RA discussion thread.

The first point was about the issue Schnauzers raised in that thread. One can infer that if more than one member feels the same way there actually IS something to discuss. It would not be playing "fast and loose" with the rules for a VD to say, "Hey, we haven't heard from nations XY&Z on this. I think their opinions are important. I'm going to PM them so they can weigh in. Meanwhile we'll keep the discussion/vote open a couple more days." Let me repeat the vital part of this hypothetical quote: "Their opinions are important."
 
All I did in the RA thread was note a fact that SS probably should have mentioned to the RA.

We now have another procedural hurdle. Plem has now acknowledged that he resigned from the WA and it sounds as if he did so while the SC vote was ongoing. Consequently, I question whether the SC vote was even valid; and since he currently does not have sufficient endos to apply, I think the application is void.

We need to discuss.
 
He had enough endos when he applied. Normally, when an SC member's count is outside the guidelines, he is given a certain amount of time to make adjustments. I don't see a concrete reason why the same principle should not apply to a nominee.

In the RA thread, you also registered your disagreement with how the vote was handled. That's why I brought it up here. So we could sort it out all together.
 
Great Bights Mum:
He had enough endos when he applied. Normally, when an SC member's count is outside the guidelines, he is given a certain amount of time to make adjustments. I don't see a concrete reason why the same principle should not apply to a nominee.

In the RA thread, you also registered your disagreement with how the vote was handled. That's why I brought it up here. So we could sort it out all together.
Click to expand...
The problem now is that the applicant lost their eligibility to apply before they were nominated by the SC and before they were approved by the RA. I don't think we have the legal authority to treat the application as valid when in fact they no longer met the requirements for admission and had not yet been admitted the first time.
 
The constitution requires that nations have the requisite influence and endorsements at the time they apply, and the legal code requires that security council members maintain both during their tenure. The LC also states that an application which ceases to meet the minimum requirements must be rejected.

However, it is silent on the question of nominees (as it should be), and from what I can tell plembobria retained the necessary endorsement and influence levels throughout the voting period. When someone leaves the RA after the end of a voting period, their vote during that period is not discounted. Similarly, when someone withdraws their RA application after a VD block, the RA still votes on the question. A similar principle may be in play here, since plembobria did not fall below the required endorsement count until after the stated end of the voting period.

I'm honestly not sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top