Yer Friendly Neighborhood Ass

Hi all! Many of you probably know me by various names (including 'That Guy') and through various channels, but I'm Yeraennus, a regular on the TNP IRC and various Discord servers. I used to be on the RMB a lot as well, but the time spent there has unfortunately dwindled by a bit. Anyways, as is probably already obvious by now, I'm running for Vice Delegate on the same ticket as my long-time acquaintance Plembobria (check out his thread!). Quite honestly, my resume is quite a bit smaller than most of the people running this cycle (being former Deputy Attorney General and was recently being made a member of the cartography team for TNP are my two major accomplishments in NS). However, I think I'm a pretty cool cat, and here's why.

1.) I'm active. I am on NationStates itself, the TNP forums, and several Discord servers quite literally every day, despite my busy school schedule. If I can't respond immediately, I'll be sure to get to a position where I can respond as soon as possible.

2.) I'm willing to help. I will always answer questions to the best of my ability, from anyone and about (almost) any subject. What I can't help you with, I can help you find someone who can.

3.) I'm willing to learn. I love learning, and always enjoy picking up new skills, be it linguistics, diplomacy, art and design, human sacrifice, whatever! I see the office of Vice Delegate as a good way to get in touch with and learn the ins-and-outs of The North Pacific and its inhabitants, as well as pick up other valuable skills for careers both in NS and real life down the road.

4.) I'm loyal. I have never left, and never plan to leave The North Pacific in my time on Nationstates. The people are friendly, the roleplay is swell, and the community is absolutely huge! I love this place, nothing more to it.

And that's it! If I don't know something, I'll be sure to learn it, and if I do know something, I'll be sure to help. Feel free to ask questions in the the thread below!

Generally, why is it better for the Delegate and Vice Delegate to stand together on a ticket than to stand independently of each other? Particularly, why is it better for yourself to stand and be elected as Delegate and Vice Delegate as a ticket with Plemby rather than standing independently of each other?

I choose to ignore the Zyvet-snipe.

Why are you running on a ticket?

I'm asking this seriously, and would really like a thoughtful and thorough answer. We elect our Delegate and Vice Delegate separately, and the idea of a ticket only started within the last couple of years - I believe mcm and I pioneered it, IIRC. Ever since then, though, candidates have started pairing themselves off in ways that are not really clear to me (and probably not to most voters). Honestly, I find it a worrying trend.

So. What is it about the other person on your ticket that convinced you to try to tie yourselves together in the minds of the voters? What kind of partnership do you two have that makes your pairing better for the region than your individual election? What concerns do you have about working with one of the other candidates for the delegacy or vice delegacy that you do not have about your running mate? Why should voters vote the ticket at all?

I do acknowledge that tickets in The North Pacific are relatively unsupported by the election process (among other things), but there are a few reasons why I find tickets during elections to be beneficial to the region. The first reason is that most tickets are composed of individuals with complimentary or mutual goals and ideas for the future of the region. This means there won't be four months of back and forth between the Vice Delegate and Delegate on each other's goals for the region. While this might not always happen with independent campaigns, it is capable of cropping up. Second is that (at least for me), it gives the campaignees (is that a word?) more confidence in their campaign, knowing they have someone with similar interests they can rely on.

As to your question of why I want to tie myself with Plemby, it's again for a couple of reasons. Firstly, we're both relatively long-time acquaintances in NationStates. I've known him since my inception on this site, which is approaching two years, and we have pretty much always been amiable towards each other. Being established friends or acquaintances helps in governing and administrating certain styles of communities like here. Secondly, he and I have similar wishes for TNP, especially in the matters of Gameside and Cultural Affairs, two departments which I feel (since I have been here) have always lacked in activity, which is quite honestly detrimental to bringing in and welcoming new members of our wonderful community.

I hope my response is sufficient for ya'll.

Yeraennus:

I do acknowledge that tickets in The North Pacific are relatively unsupported by the election process (among other things), but there are a few reasons why I find tickets during elections to be beneficial to the region. The first reason is that most tickets are composed of individuals with complimentary or mutual goals and ideas for the future of the region. This means there won't be four months of back and forth between the Vice Delegate and Delegate on each other's goals for the region. While this might not always happen with independent campaigns, it is capable of cropping up. Second is that (at least for me), it gives the campaignees (is that a word?) more confidence in their campaign, knowing they have someone with similar interests they can rely on

Click to expand...

Thank you for your answers.

In relation to the first. As you mention there is, legally, little link between the day-to-day operations of the Delegate and the Vice Delegate, they are responsible for different realms, the Delegate for the executive and the Vice Delegate for the security apparatus; historically also, there was a tendency for the Delegate and Vice Delegate to campaign and be elected quite independently and to maintain that independence in office, the innovation of tickets and of the Vice Delegate being heavily involved in the Delegate's government is a fairly new one. In view of that, and the fact that the answers of yourself and Plemby indicate more that you are running independently but endorsing each other, I'd like to ask whether it is your intention, if offered, to involve yourself in the Delegate's government (whether that is Plemby's or some other candidate's)?

Also, do you think that there are risks to the Vice Delegate being significantly involved in the Delegate's government?

What would you say is your most difficult time in TNP? How'd you overcome it?

Good Luck in your campaign, should prove interesting for my forum politics studies.

To Zyvet's question: If offered the chance to cooperate more closely with other sections of the government, delegate's or otherwise, regardless of who is delegate at the time, I would happily take that chance. I believe that cooperation is necessary from all parts of the government, especially among each branch, such as the executive duties of the delegate and vice delegate. I do not think there would be any major risk posed by the Vice Delegate cooperating significantly with the Delegate in regards to the government compared to how the system is set up now. In fact, a delegate and VD in closer cooperation might even improve government transparency and security of the region by placing a closer partnership between the two executive leaders of the region.

To Yalkan: I would have to say that the spamming and harassment incidents that occurred directed at me about half a year ago by multiple former members of the community. Thankfully, I was able to keep my head above the harassment and brought it to the attention of both the regional government and NationStates moderators with the help of a few other citizens and residents. Other than that, my team here has been stress-free for the most part.

Thanks for answering. Good luck in the elections.

Thank you for your answer!

What will be your approach to security checking new citizens if you are elected? What criteria will you use to gauge an applicant's risk level, how much do you expect to consult the SC (every applicant? only some? how will you decide?), and are there any previous examples of security check decisions that you disagree with?

Also, since I missed you last time, which TNP laws are you most excited to break? How flagrantly do you intend to abuse your power and misconduct yourself grossely? Can the region trust you to be the kind of reliably corrupt official we have come to rely and depend on?

Good luck to your goals,I hope the best for TNP

Yeraennus, if you were Vice Delegate during an outbreak of a virulent (yet curable!) disease, what do you envision as your role in addressing it? Additionally, how do you believe it should be addressed (namely, curing the affected citizens, doing nothing, or murdering them mercilessly), and how will you handle it if the person elected Delegate has a different opinion?

What areas of The North Pacific do you believe require the most work/improvement and how do you plan on improving them?

Sillystring, to your first question: As I am new to this office, and government in general, I suppose, I'll look to more experienced members of the government for advice, and consulting with the security council will be my first priority on any matter I am unsure of. I cannot think of any checks I would have disagreed with in specific, due to my only recently large interest in TNP politics. Apologies that I couldn't answer your question to the extent you might have wanted.

Well, uh, I am not a crook, so there. Now to assume in a completely hypothetical universe that cropped up the extremely unlikely chance of me being someone so vile and deplorable as a criminal, it would probably be related to the sacrifice of innocents. I get hungry sometimes. So there. Or something. Shhh.

And now your third question: Quarantine the infected and slaughter them over the course of a few months to prevent public knowledge. To answer in all seriousness, because of the assumed upcoming NSZombies event, I would focus on getting the borders as air-tight as possible , as it lets us control our infected levels rather than having potentially hundreds of zombie scumbags differently alive individual nations flock to us for any purpose, deplorable or noble. Then, I would consult with the delegate on placing a poll on the TNP RMB to determine this region's course of action by the people. Democracy and what not, you know? That way, the delegate and I are forced to compromise instead of butting heads while our beautiful and loyal peasants citizens are brutally slaughtered by undead hordes.

To Kasch: I regard any department that reaches out to our community to be in need of improvement, such as Communications, Gameside, or Cultural Affairs. The active population on this forum is dwarfed by the actual population of TNP, regardless of how large this forum's community is. We, as a region, should promote participation on this forum as much as possible to better represent the interests of TNP. I plan to work with Department ministers to set determined schedules for the various telegrams, TGs, and events proposed by each in order to bring more people into active members of the TNP forums.

Yeraennus:

To Kasch: I regard any department that reaches out to our community to be in need of improvement, such as Communications, Gameside, or Cultural Affairs. The active population on this forum is dwarfed by the actual population of TNP, regardless of how large this forum's community is. We, as a region, should promote participation on this forum as much as possible to better represent the interests of TNP. I plan to work with Department ministers to set determined schedules for the various telegrams, TGs, and events proposed by each in order to bring more people into active members of the TNP forums.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the answer, and good luck.

Yeraennus:

To Zyvet's question: If offered the chance to cooperate more closely with other sections of the government, delegate's or otherwise, regardless of who is delegate at the time, I would happily take that chance. I believe that cooperation is necessary from all parts of the government, especially among each branch, such as the executive duties of the delegate and vice delegate. I do not think there would be any major risk posed by the Vice Delegate cooperating significantly with the Delegate in regards to the government compared to how the system is set up now. In fact, a delegate and VD in closer cooperation might even improve government transparency and security of the region by placing a closer partnership between the two executive leaders of the region.

Click to expand...

Thank you for that answer.

If I may press you a little. I find it curious that you do not see the risk of having the Delegate and Vice Delegate closely intertwined when one of the Vice Delegate's most important duty (though it is thankfully not one they have been regularly called to fulfill lately) is to enforce the removal of the Delegate from the Delegacy in the event that they are recalled or sentenced to removal from office. Do you not consider this a possible risk (I should note, I do not mean in relation to yourself and Plembobria specifically, but in relation to candidates elected on tickets generally)?

Also, in relation to an answer in contained in the post above you say that the government needs to do better to represent the interests of the region at large. Do you think that there are any legal reforms or policies that could be put in place which would help do so, outside of increasing forum participation? (For instance, reforming electoral law to use gameside polling to some extent in relation to elections or by returning the system that was used some years ago now to have advisory elections for the Executive Council to help the Delegate determine who to appoint)

Pardon the lateness of my reply.

The Vice Delegate failing to enforce the removal of the delegate may happen regardless of the circumstances, and should be considered a possible risk in every situation, but the relation between the Vice Delegate and Delegate as their respective offices is a professional one, which should not (an idealistic view, to be honest) be effected b any out-of-office relations, as it is up to both the Delegate and VD to uphold their respective oaths of office.

To be honest, the adage "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink it", is quite applicable in this instance. It is very hard to rope together and force a community so large as TNP's to participate on the forums. However, by increasing the amount of awareness about the forums and the activities presented in the forum, either through more active TGing, regular updates of the WFE or announcements posted on the RMB, we might see an uptick from the set-up we have now, with quite uninteresting (I must admit, even I skip over them many times) TGs every once and a while from only one or two of the relevant ministries and the WFE changing only really at the start of every administration or the appointment of a new minister, and little RMB activity from the members of the government to promote awareness of the off-site forums and government. While I admit that gameside polling for elections would see a sharp uptick in electoral participation, it is far too easy to commit fraud by creating several puppets and storing them in TNP to bias the election toward the favored candidate. The setup we have now is as far as I can tell the hardest to cheat system that could be reasonably instated without a drastic overhaul of the government and role of the off-site forums.

Thank you for your questions.

Good luck

In the thread of another candidate, when asking about the matter of the Vice Delegate's security check, I learned a little about the Vice Delegate's performance of the check of which I was unaware. Namely, that the Vice Delegate does not always consult with the Security Council when performing the check.

I have a couple questions in this regard. Firstly, presuming that this report of the practicality is accurate, how do you think it squares with the requirement in law that "All security assessments will be performed in consultation with the Security Council, and in accordance with all laws of The North Pacific."? Secondly, presuming that it is accurate and that it, in your view, does not square, ought the law be reformed to reflect this practicality or ought the practice of the Vice Delegate change so as to conform more closely with the law?

It falls in a grey area. On one hand, the Vice Delegate giving security checks without the assessment of the Security Council does ignore the letter of the law, it is also needlessly impractical and time-consuming for the vice delegate to consult with the security council on every new citizen applicant, or wherever else a security check may apply. The vice delegate should be given the power to pass most security checks without the consultation of the Security Council, in order to streamline the security check process, but updates on security checks should be given to the security council at regular intervals to prevent the vice delegate from being able to ignore the security council.

Yeraennus:

It falls in a grey area. On one hand, the Vice Delegate giving security checks without the assessment of the Security Council does ignore the letter of the law, it is also needlessly impractical and time-consuming for the vice delegate to consult with the security council on every new citizen applicant, or wherever else a security check may apply. The vice delegate should be given the power to pass most security checks without the consultation of the Security Council, in order to streamline the security check process, but updates on security checks should be given to the security council at regular intervals to prevent the vice delegate from being able to ignore the security council.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your answers. Just for clarification, you would advocate to change the law in order to reflect the practicality? If not, why do you consider it adequate to maintain a law which may lead citizens to have an incorrect impression of its meaning (namely, the impression that "all" means "all" rather than "a sub-set of all")?

The clarification is correct. There is no need to introduce or maintain needless steps for simple citizen applications.

Your opponents, Praetor and Lord Ravenclaw, to some extent at least, would also reform the law in this area to more closely reflect the practicalities of performing security assessments.

Praetor (presuming I understand him correctly) suggests a reform of the law similar to your own. Lord Ravenclaw suggests that the law could be reformed so that there was a dedicated Councillor advising the Vice Delegate at any given time, this would allow for the expertise of a Councillor to be made available to the Vice Delegate (who may be relatively unaware of some security risks and of particular individuals who may pose threats) and could avoid the inefficiency of requiring the advice of the Council at large. Do you have a view on the reform which was mooted by Lord Ravenclaw?

Your opponent, Romanoffia, suggests (if I understand him correctly) making changes to procedure to introduce more perfunctory consultation for all applicants, this could avoid the potential for a inexperienced Vice Delegate passing an applicant who appears to present no risk when a Councillor could have flagged the applicant as being a risk, why would you not pursue this?

In the past (before March last year), the Security Council would conduct discussion of prospective members of the Council in a forum that was publicly visible, they have since stopped doing so. What is your view of the notion of public discussions of applications to the Security Council or of the disclosure of such discussions once they have concluded, what benefits and drawbacks are there? More generally, ought the Security Council be subject to the freedom of information provisions in the Codified Law?