Anyways, now that I've found some time while I'm on this work-cation, allow me to get on with answering the pending questions.
To Darcania...
TNP has been my home since I first founded my nation and I immediately became interested in the World Assembly Development Program and its mission to strengthen regional security through endorsement exchanges. Beyond that, I've often wondered how I could contribute more in this area. I was however quite aware of the unwritten rule of serving in an elected position first, since being an elected official requires a great deal of trust and even more so for a security councillor. It was only after a
third Vice Delegate approached me about being part of the council that I decided to apply anyways. (The first time I was approached about this was February of
last year.)
To Zyvet...
1. I believe the current state of disclosure is appropriate. It is wise for the SC to take into consideration the sensitive nature of discussions as it relates to regional security prior to making disclosures other than what is required by law. Even applications and nominations fall into that category, especially when there's the possibility that disclosing a discussion may compromise the SC's ability to act on a potential threat. I think that even disclosing conversations about nominees that passed the first layer of scrutiny compromises conversations about those who have not for a security reason. I would be really curious how the rest of the security council sees that.
2. I believe it would be prudent for the Security Council to formally revoke nominations after a certain amount of time, since as time passes a person's history obviously has more information added to it and these additions may be important enough to evaluate the candidate once again. It may be tough to come up with the best amount of time, but perhaps re-evaluation after 4 months is a starting point. I also think it would be in the council's best interest to evaluate the reasons that the Regional Assembly turned down a candidate and determine if revocation should happen right then and there. I would even advocate for that to be part of the procedure going forward.
3. I trust that the veteran members of the council know the ideal number of councillors needed. There are other factors, such as endorsement counts and the available SPDR of each member, that I think would make a fixed maximum number councillors inadvisable. Those factors also make it hard for me to say whether we are at a reasonable upper-bound or not.
To Eluvatar...
1. Blue. And no, it's not because our flag has blue in it. Just was, though I did have a red phase while working fast food. Reds were managers. >
2.
Ouagadougou
3. I think TNP law would be considered Civil Law. The Constibilicode is by its very nature Civil Law, as our law is
codified in that document. Our court rulings utilize
interpretations related to clauses in that document. It is not a case of the court ruling out of common sense or based off any precedent founded on the common sense. Precedent in our court system follows decisions which were already founded from the written Constibilicode.
To Kasch...
Playing "Drown" on anything affected by "Fountain of Eternal Life" would create an infinite loop, as the target would be sent to the graveyard and immediately special summoned into the same "Drown" condition. Therefore it would be an illegal move.
