Search results

Delegate: < Halsoni > Would you like to reopen nominations? < No > Vice Delegate: < Voopmont > Would you like to reopen nominations? < No > Speaker: 1. < Ayuzh > 2. < Meteturan > 3. < Ruby > Would you like to reopen nominations? < No >

It looks like everyone, including Bren, has said their piece, so I move for a vote.

You say that TNP should become a hegemonic power, can you outline what our main tools of power projection are in your view? Acknowledging the benefits of consistent leadership, do you think it could inadvertently lead to stagnation for one person to serve as Delegate for so long, more than a year?

How would you decide whether to deny an applicant for citizenship?

I mean, Rocketdog isn't the first Security Councillor to have this happen, and to an extent it's a little unfair that he's receiving pushback where others haven't. And Ruben's point that posting on the forum usually doesn't directly relate to the SC's job is well-taken. In an ideal world, would...

Not intending to vote against, but can Rocketdog speak to concerns over his activity?

I nominate @Voopmont for Vice Delegate.

Just my two cents, and it doesn't matter much either way, but I like the classic banners we have. Europeia's are quite similar to the Xenforo defaults and I think ours are distinctive.

Congratulations to the new ministers!

I think permanent citizenship is a bit dubious because it locks electoral power in the hands of retired players; those players may have contributed a lot to the region, but at the end of the day our government needs to serve the will of the actually active community. There's also the question of...

Medal of Manumission? Corresponds to our regional day, and it's alliterative.

Why? Just because you want to create an award by statute with the same name is no reason to strip an existing award from its recipients. I also wonder why the Order of Polaris can only be awarded once, especially when the Medal of Honour can explicitly be awarded multiple times.

For

Court Justice: 1. < Pallaith > 2. < Chipoli > 3. < Skaraborg > 4. < Lord Dominator > 5. < Bharat > Would you like to reopen nominations? < No >

This is a reason to vote against, not to block the vote at the eleventh hour.

I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.

For

For

For

I'm not saying the repeal doesn't matter at all. I'm saying that what seems to be the core argument, that the original resolution mentions the name of some GGR nations, doesn't... really make a lot of sense, because that part is just strikethrough.

Nonsense. Repealing this resolution isn't going to strike the names from the record, it's just going to format them with strikethrough text. Against.

Nation in The North Pacific: Huerta Marquez Current World Assembly nation: Stolypin Discord Username (if applicable): monichre Are you able to attend operations at 12AM/12PM EST? And if so, which times can you attend? Either, depending on when. Which branch (the Special Forces or Auxiliary) do...

Speaker: < St George > Would you like to reopen nominations? < No >

I think this bill would be stronger if you removed "forswearing." By replicating the exact definition of Gross Misconduct, I worry that you're just replicating the problem we already have.

I assume step 1 is the creation of a clone army

Some would say you can't insult your way to unlimited power, what say you?

Your recent initiatives seem disconnected from your party's stated purpose. Some would say that your party is devoid of competent leadership and distracted by foreign entanglements. What say you?

If there is controversy over a change the speaker makes to the text of the law, doesn't that indicate that the change is not actually purely clerical? We're talking here about corrections that are supposed to be so inconsequential that they have literally no impact on the meaning of the law...

I'd be hesitant to support this without a mechanism for the RA to override the Speaker's decision, because sometimes what counts as "substantive meaning" is ambiguous. For the same reason I think it is better to say "may" rather than "will," because I think there are cases where reasonable...

Well, it turns out you were right about the two justices not being able to agree, so now it's a moot point :P