A few questions

You spent your whole time trying to pick out a reason to disagree with the proposal of a private area for the RA to discuss issues!! Not once did you take anything anyone else said into account and now you complain when your arguments are shotdown with logic and commonsense!!

Maybe if you actually came into the discussion with an open mind you might have got more out of it!! But I guess its much easier to cry when you can't win the argument and hope that Sniffles and Co will come and protect you from big bad GM and Polts!!

If you can actually point out any flaws in the argument we have presented then please do so!! From your reaction and previous posts, I assume you cannot!!
Click to expand...

I was going to leave this alone....but I can't....

It seems the difference between me and Gracius Maximus and Poltsaama is that I don't mind if they disagree with me...that's their right...yet they seem to find it unbearable that anyone should disagree with them...

I am curious about the notion that my asking questions to more fully understand the proposol is "picking holes"...
yet Gracius Maximus and Poltsaama asking questions is not...

And I did not complain that my arguments were "shot down" with what you generously term logic and commonsense...
I complained that I felt my asking for information was not only ignored but resulted in thinly veiled insults eg "irrelevant"...

and I complained about the assertion that I had not read the thread which I have repeatedly.....
and I did come into this with an open mind...unlike Poltsaama and Gracius Maximus IMHO....
and I did take everything everybody said into account ...It just didn't make me agree with the proposol....

And by the way it would take a lot more than this to make me cry....Though if it makes you feel better about your stance I could I suppose squeeze out a few drops...

I'm going to try to put this simply....

1) so far the question has been raised repeatedly as to what specific circumstances a closed forum is needed...
so far the only replies seem to be something vague about security or sensitive subjects....hardly specific....
or the answer that a discussion of an outside nations status in TNP...
this seems to me invalid as that nation would surely be aware that their relationship or status is in question in TNP for it to have reached a point where there is a discussion by the RA....

2)IMHO it is up to Gracius Maximus to convince us of the validity of his arguments as he introduced this proposol....not for us to invalidate them....or point out any floors(did you mean flaws?)

3)In Gracius maximus' original post he asked for the thoughts of the RA and the cabinet....and yet anyone posting a thought based on their opinion have been pilloried or argued against vehemently....perhaps in future rather than asking for thoughts you should ask either for people to prepare to argue their case...or just ask people to post their agreement....
 
Romanoffia:
Laws (resolutions) are like sausages - no one should ever see them being made.
Click to expand...
Give credit where credit is due...

"There are two things in the world you never want to let people see how you make 'em: laws and sausages." The West Wing, Season 1, Episode 4: "Five Votes Down"
 
Daimiaena, the reason I respond as I do when someone posts a counter opinion is simply because they are obviously incorrect in their position.
 
Daimiaena:
...
1) so far the question has been raised repeatedly as to what specific circumstances a closed forum is needed...
so far the only replies seem to be something vague about security or sensitive subjects....hardly specific....
or the answer that a discussion of an outside nations status in TNP...
this seems to me invalid as that nation would surely be aware that their relationship or status is in question in TNP for it to have reached a point where there is a discussion by the RA....
...
Click to expand...
I'll give a concrete example for you

Say a region somewhat unknown to us (other than having a consulate here), wants to establish a full treaty or something of the sort. The treaty will be examined by the cabinet and if appropriate the cabinet will pass it on to the legislature. Some of the discuscion in the RA might be extremeley candid and could potentially offend the external region (as they would be monitoring our forum quite closeley). Is it not reasonable to assume that if some RA members wanted to express their oppinions to the RA without disclosing them to the external region that the ability to post in a area where members of the RA/Cabinet Ministers/Moderators/Administrators could read it and not diplomats from other regions?

Having the option to do business behind closed doors does not mean that all business will be conducted behind the closed doors. If you, and others, feel that the RA is intentionally hiding it's business then form a coalition of your own, introduce legislation to reform the system, and run for elected offices to change the policy. Don't just sit on the sidelines crying "Wah! They're excluding me because I'm not one of the cool kids!" You have to interact in more than contentious situations to disolve the image that you don't care about the region but only about specific political issues.
 
Gracius Maximus:
AlHoma:
Romanoffia:
Laws (resolutions) are like sausages - no one should ever see them being made.
Click to expand...
Give credit where credit is due...

"There are two things in the world you never want to let people see how you make 'em: laws and sausages." The West Wing, Season 1, Episode 4: "Five Votes Down"
Click to expand...
Umm...

Otto von Bismarck, late 19th century.
Click to expand...
I've looked at the attribution and I suspect that while the von Bismark refrence is tangentially correct, I feel more confident that Romanoffia was refrering to the West Wing refrence
 
Gracius Maximus:
Daimiaena, the reason I respond as I do when someone posts a counter opinion is simply because they are obviously incorrect in their position.
Click to expand...
:lol:
Thank you....at least you're honest about it....incorrigble....but honest...

@Alhoma....
thank you for your example...a shame you had to spoil it with the whole "wah...cool kids" reference...that is exactly the attitude I am complaining about...

you seem to be expressing from the viewpoint that the forum is already decided upon and anyone who doesn't agree with it have to put up with it until the next elections....even though a lot of currently elected govt members are against this proposal it seems that you've decided to go through with it...therefore how would being elected make any difference....

and I wasn't aware that I had the image of not caring about the TNP...I'd have thought wanting to keep the region as open as it was when I first arrived would count for something...that my joining the RA and the NPA might count as interaction and imply that I do care for the region...
 
Upper Kirby:
Poltsamaa:
As has been pointed out numerous times, there is no negative impact!!
Click to expand...
I don't know of many resolutions reached because the proposition had no negative impact.

The people who are in the RA/Cabinet are the citizens of TNP under our Constitution!! You know, the leagal document that determines how our region operates?!
Click to expand...

Belittle me.

Under your logic, we should allow non-citizens to vote and run for office otherwise we are limiting their participation in the region also!!
Click to expand...

Reductio ad absurdum, reduce my argument to an illogical conclusion. Then argue against that.

Where does it end?!
Click to expand...

When you got off that slope it just may. Be careful of your step: it's slippery.



For someone who has dismissed the majority of comments in this thread as either illogical, poorly strung together, or balderdash rhetoric masking ulterior motives you sure haven't made things easier for others to take you seriously.
Click to expand...
So you have no rebuttal to my argument and try to hide it with pseudo-intellectual babble!! Good job!!

If you do have any rebuttals to my argument, let me know!!
 
Daimiaena:
I was going to leave this alone....but I can't....

It seems the difference between me and Gracius Maximus and Poltsaama is that I don't mind if they disagree with me...that's their right...yet they seem to find it unbearable that anyone should disagree with them...
Click to expand...
Wrong, I can't find any comment that complains that you disagree with me or GM!! I can only find rebuttals to your comments and leading questions!! If you cannot tolerate having your argument challenged, then it is you that has the issue and not I!! Notice, it is not me wanting to take their bat and ball and go home!!

I am curious about the notion that my asking questions to more fully understand the proposol is "picking holes"...
yet Gracius Maximus and Poltsaama asking questions is not...
Click to expand...

It is Poltsamaa!! Secondly, I don't care if you ask questions or "pick holes" in arguments!! That is what debate is all about!! Again, I don't see myself complaining about your questions or comments!! I only see myself and GM presenting arguments to counter them!! If you want to preach to the choir then you best do it somewhere else!!

And I did not complain that my arguments were "shot down" with what you generously term logic and commonsense...
I complained that I felt my asking for information was not only ignored but resulted in thinly veiled insults eg "irrelevant"...
Click to expand...

Your questions were answered!! It is not my fault nor my problem that you did not like the answers!! If you want to ask questions or post comments, then expect them to be replied to!! I'm not aware of any insults!! Saying your point in "irrelevant" is not an insult, it is an assessment of your argument!! If you want to take criticism of your argument personally then that is your problem and you should not expect people to walk on egg shells around you because of it!!

and I complained about the assertion that I had not read the thread which I have repeatedly.....
and I did come into this with an open mind...unlike Poltsaama and Gracius Maximus IMHO....
Click to expand...

I came here with an opinion, I posted my opinion and read other peoples' opinions and reasons for their opinion!! Nothing i have read has changed my opinion yet!! Your claim to have come here with an open mind is not entirely correct as your questions were very slanted to opposition of the proposal!! Your relauctance to actually engage myself or GM on the issues raised lends credence to my assessment of your intentions!! If you had a good argument against what we have said, surely you would have knocked us over with it rather than crying foul and running away!!

and I did take everything everybody said into account  ...It just didn't make me agree with the proposol....
Click to expand...

What is it that makes you disagree with the proposal?! Seeing as most of what you have posted was easily countered!! Yes, this is an invitation to debate the issue if you are up to it!!

And by the way it would take a lot more than this to make me cry....Though if it makes you feel better about your stance I could I suppose squeeze out a few drops...
Click to expand...

Your emotional reaction to the argument has no bearing on my argument!! Throwing your toys out of the pram and trying to play the victim is really not a great way of dealing with debate!!

I'm going to try to put this simply....

1) so far the question has been raised repeatedly as to what specific circumstances a closed forum is needed...
so far the only replies seem to be something vague about security or sensitive subjects....hardly specific....
or the answer that a discussion of an outside nations status in TNP...
this seems to me invalid as that nation would surely be aware that their relationship or status is in question in TNP for it to have reached a point where there is a discussion by the RA....
Click to expand...

I did mention specifics earlier in the thread!! Go back and reread it if you like!! I mentioned the discussion of information or proposals that relate ot other regions or alliances!! Would it not be prudent to have somewhere out of foreigners' view to discuss these matters?!
I also mentioned the dissolution of treaties in which the RA may be called on to discuss and vote on!! Again, more prudent to have somewhere out of fereigners' view to discuss this, no?!
Then there is the last scenario I presented where a member of the RA might have an issue they want to raise concerning another region or alliance and not feel comfortable raising in in open view of foreigners!! The option to raise the issue in a private RA forum would again be more prudent, in my opinion!!

2)IMHO it is up to Gracius Maximus to convince us of the validity of his arguments as he introduced this proposol....not for us to invalidate them....or point out any floors(did you mean flaws?)
Click to expand...

I believe my quote uses "flaws", is that ambiguous or an attempt to insult?! Heaven forbid!! I believe GM has done a great job selling this proposal and a number of people seem in favour of it!! Some even changing their minds after the discussion clarified a few concerns for them!!

3)In Gracius maximus' original post he asked for the thoughts of the RA and the cabinet....and yet anyone posting a thought based on their opinion have been pilloried or argued against vehemently....perhaps in future rather than asking for thoughts you should ask either for people to prepare to argue their case...or just ask people to post their agreement....
Click to expand...

No, it is called debate!! You ask questions and make comments on an issue, those that disagree with you post rebuttals and back and forth we go!! If you prefer to discuss things only with people who share your beliefs then, as I said, you are probably in the wrong place!!
There is only one person with a closed mind here, and it is you!!
 
While I rarely find reason to disagree with my associate, Poltsamaa, I must point out that there are at least two closed minds here.

I am correct and therefore have no reason to consider other options.
 
The entire idea of a private RA chamber is an interesting idea, and does have merits..

However, I personally feel that the good aspect of having people see what we're talking about outweighs the potential pitfalls. Since the RA pretty much is the central power in the government -- the RA members elect the Cabinet, we propose the laws, etc.. I think we should keep the forum open to everyone so that any person can see exactly what kind of debate goes on here.. I mean, I wouldn't want to restrict the excellent debate we're having on this very issue into a private RA room. ;)

Plus there's thep ossibility that people will post more and more of their ideas in the private RA forum, for whatever reason.. and there won't be anything on the public forum except announcements of which legislation passed. Granted, that's an extreme example, but it is possible, especially because many people inherently like "private" rooms/forums better.

Having said that, the creation of a private RA forum would be acceptable to me if it's made clear that, if someone posts something there that does not require a private forum, then it should be moved to the public one immediately by the Speaker. (Although I'm loathe to give that job description more responsibility, it is the logical choice).
 
Gracius Maximus:
Simply because you disagree with his conclusions doesn't make them invalid. If you believe them invalid then provide reasons for that instead of just saying "no, you are exaggerating my point".
Click to expand...
My post said or intonated nothing of the sort. It was not debating him or you or Spuds McKenzie on this issue or any other.

Regardless, it is hard to give an Affirmitive much validity when there is so little substance to his argument beyond stretching things around and attacking people.
 
Upper Kirby:
My post said or intonated nothing of the sort. It was not debating him or you or Spuds McKenzie on this issue or any other.

Regardless, it is hard to give an Affirmitive much validity when there is so little substance to his argument beyond stretching things around and attacking people.
Click to expand...
Wow, another statement devoid of substance!! Do you have anything to contribute to the debate on the issue?!
 
wizardofoz01:
The entire idea of a private RA chamber is an interesting idea, and does have merits..

However, I personally feel that the good aspect of having people see what we're talking about outweighs the potential pitfalls. Since the RA pretty much is the central power in the government -- the RA members elect the Cabinet, we propose the laws, etc.. I think we should keep the forum open to everyone so that any person can see exactly what kind of debate goes on here.. I mean, I wouldn't want to restrict the excellent debate we're having on this very issue into a private RA room. ;)
Click to expand...
This debate would have no need to be in the private forum as it does not discuss issues regarding other regions/alliances that might cause a reaction from the region/alliance mentioned!!

Plus there's thep ossibility that people will post more and more of their ideas in the private RA forum, for whatever reason.. and there won't be anything on the public forum except announcements of which legislation passed. Granted, that's an extreme example, but it is possible, especially because many people inherently like "private" rooms/forums better.
Click to expand...

Having the option of a private forum for the RA will actually increase the freedom of members of the RA by giving them the choice of raising issues privately or publicly!! It may even mean that people will post things privately that they would be worried about posting publicly meaning we get greater interaction and an environment where ideas can be floated without fear of a public backlash!! I understand that the example you raise is extreme and by all means possible!! But with the discussion you have seen here, can you really see anyone allowing the RA to operate exclusively behind closed doors?!

Having said that, the creation of a private RA forum would be acceptable to me if it's made clear that, if someone posts something there that does not require a private forum, then it should be moved to the public one immediately by the Speaker. (Although I'm loathe to give that job description more responsibility, it is the logical choice).
Click to expand...

Your idea has some merit, although I'm loathe to have a "police officer" charged with deciding what warrants and does not warrant use of the private forum!! I'm not aware we have such a system in place for the Cabinet so I do not think the RA should be treated any differently!!
Although if something posted in the private forum is generally deemed OK to post in the public forum then I have no problem with the thread being moved!! It isn't too difficult to determine what may or may not generate a reaction from other regions/alliances and if we err on the side of safety and post in the private forum it can easily be moved to the public forum if deemed appropriate to do so!!
 
Poltsamaa:
Upper Kirby:
My post said or intonated nothing of the sort. It was not debating him or you or Spuds McKenzie on this issue or any other.

Regardless, it is hard to give an Affirmitive much validity when there is so little substance to his argument beyond stretching things around and attacking people.
Click to expand...
Wow, another statement devoid of substance!! Do you have anything to contribute to the debate on the issue?!
Click to expand...
:eyeroll: Oh, there you go again.
 
Poltsamaa:
Upper Kirby:
:eyeroll: Oh, there you go again.
Click to expand...
Ditto!!

I am serious, do you have anything to add to the discussion or are you just trolling?!
Click to expand...
Troll: To post in a forum or on Usenet a message designed to attract predictable responses or flames. Derives from "trolling", a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. Trolls are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him, he's just a troll." One not infrequently sees the warning "Do not feed the troll" as part of a followup to troll postings. 1
Click to expand...

You're the one that's attacking people. In fact you've done little but. I haven't uttered a harsh word against anyone. Would just rather you stop with the bullying tactics.
 
Upper Kirby:
Troll: To post in a forum or on Usenet a message designed to attract predictable responses or flames. Derives from "trolling", a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. Trolls are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him, he's just a troll." One not infrequently sees the warning "Do not feed the troll" as part of a followup to troll postings. 1
Click to expand...

You're the one that's attacking people. In fact you've done little but. I haven't uttered a harsh word against anyone. Would just rather you stop with the bullying tactics.
Click to expand...
No, I have attacked peoples' arguments!! Thats what debate is!! The fact that some take such things as personal attacks should not deter us from debate!!

I suggest you go back and read the thread, I have posted at length on why I support the proposal!! Those you are going in to bat for have not provided a scrap of information that supports their stance or counters my statements and have in fact stated that their reason for disagreeing is "personal" and refuse to disclose it!! This is after their other attempts to debate were shot down!!

I tend to view trolls as people who enter debates with no other purpose that to post off-topic comments directed at a person rather than the argument in an attempt to get a rise out of them!! I think you fall into that category as you have presented nothing to the debate other than comment on my demeanor!! Your comments are uninformed and inaccurate, but that does not really matter to trolls!!

Can you present where I have attacked people personally in this thread?! A few quotes will do!! Seeing as I have not been warned by the Admins or Mods for what you are accusing me of, I don't think there is a problem!! This forum is strictly moderated and I usually get a tap on the shoulder if someone starts crying!!
 
Gracius Maximus:
AlHoma:
Romanoffia:
Laws (resolutions) are like sausages - no one should ever see them being made.
Click to expand...
Give credit where credit is due...

"There are two things in the world you never want to let people see how you make 'em: laws and sausages." The West Wing, Season 1, Episode 4: "Five Votes Down"
Click to expand...
Umm...

Otto von Bismarck, late 19th century.
Click to expand...
Correct, actually. I am guilty of paraphrase-itis or loosely translating German into English.

Bismarck was a great political 'artist', but his arrogance and and overconfidence lead to his obslolescence and ultimate downfall in the end. But he liked good beer and despised sausage makers and that makes him OK in my book.

R
 
Poltsamaa:
I tend to view trolls as people who enter debates with no other purpose that to post off-topic comments directed at a person rather than the argument in an attempt to get a rise out of them!!
Click to expand...
I haven't been trying to get a rise out of you at all.

Can you present where I have attacked people personally in this thread?! A few quotes will do!!
Click to expand...

"The people who are in the RA/Cabinet are the citizens of TNP under our Constitution!! You know, the leagal document that determines how our region operates?!" Insinuate they're an idiot.

"So you have no rebuttal to my argument and try to hide it with pseudo-intellectual babble!! Good job!!" Insinuate they're an idiot, again.

This post here. What the heck does that even have to do with the issue?

Poltsamaa with subjective and/or personal remarks in bold:
:cry:

You spent your whole time trying to pick out a reason to disagree with the proposal of a private area for the RA to discuss issues!! Not once did you take anything anyone else said into account and now you complain when your arguments are shotdown with logic and commonsense!!

Maybe if you actually came into the discussion with an open mind you might have got more out of it!! But I guess its much easier to cry when you can't win the argument and hope that Sniffles and Co will come and protect you from big bad GM and Polts!!

If you can actually point out any flaws in the argument we have presented then please do so!! From your reaction and previous posts, I assume you cannot!!
Click to expand...

"Now, do you have anything constructive to bring to the table?!" Patronizing.

"Sniffles: If you have nothing to offer a discussion it is probably best you not post!! You may risk your generic response to my post becoming boring..oops..too late!! ;)" Same kind of "you're acting stupid, shut up" attitude.

"Throwing your toys out of the pram and trying to play the victim is really not a great way of dealing with debate!!" Attack their sense of maturity, call them children.

"Wow, another statement devoid of substance!!" Not a comment directed specifically at a poster, but an example of appeal to ridicule. That's one of your favorite things to do.

"Your comments are uninformed and inaccurate, but that does not really matter to trolls!!" Call them a troll.


You haven't called anyone a son of a bitch or directly said "you're a stupid sack of crap". It's more subtle than that, a result of your hyper-aggressive "debating" style, where when you aren't angrily quoting yourself you're letting the forum know what illogical, shady, ignorant, stupid peons the people who differ in opinion from you are. You aren't technically guilty of flaming, but you are guilty of being an insufferable ass.
 
My apologies to poltsamaa for mis-spelling his name.....That was very slack of me...

I'm wondering if anyone else feels that being told the outcome of a debate without being part of that debate, even though the debate is about you, frustrating....
To be told their was a discussion about you, from which conclusions were drawn, without being allowed to defend yourself, irritating....
To not be a part of the desicion-making process, even though the desicion being made pertains to you, annoying....

I just think that is how foreigners will feel about any conclusion drawn in a closed forum...

Sorry GBM, I know I used the word you, but I mean it in a general sense
 
Upper Kirby:
I haven't been trying to get a rise out of you at all.
Click to expand...
Of course not, you just posted off-topic jibes at people for what reason?!

"The people who are in the RA/Cabinet are the citizens of TNP under our Constitution!! You know, the leagal document that determines how our region operates?!" Insinuate they're an idiot.
Click to expand...

No it is referring people to the document they seem to selectively refer to!! If people discuss matters without taking the time to actually know what they are talking about, then yes, they need to be directed to the thread/document to which an argument is based!! It doesn't insinuate they are an idiot, it shows that they are uninformed and should perhaps go back and do some research before entering a debate!!

So you have no rebuttal to my argument and try to hide it with pseudo-intellectual babble!! Good job!!" Insinuate they're an idiot, again.
Click to expand...

Just a summation of your posts!! You provide no insight into the issue and have not attempted to do so!!

Poltsamaa with subjective and/or personal remarks in bold:
:cry:

You spent your whole time trying to pick out a reason to disagree with the proposal of a private area for the RA to discuss issues!! Not once did you take anything anyone else said into account and now you complain when your arguments are shotdown with logic and commonsense!!

Maybe if you actually came into the discussion with an open mind you might have got more out of it!! But I guess its much easier to cry when you can't win the argument and hope that Sniffles and Co will come and protect you from big bad GM and Polts!!

If you can actually point out any flaws in the argument we have presented then please do so!! From your reaction and previous posts, I assume you cannot!!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I see nothing wrong with any of that!! Somebody comes in with arguments they cannot support and then attacks me for rebutting their argument and plays the sympathy card!! If someone has no argument, I will call them on it!! I cannot see any insults in what you have highlighted!! If I wanted to be abusive, I'd do a far better job of it!!

"Now, do you have anything constructive to bring to the table?!" Patronizing.
Click to expand...

No, a request to bring something to the table that is relevant to the discussion!! Something you still have not done!!

Sniffles: If you have nothing to offer a discussion it is probably best you not post!! You may risk your generic response to my post becoming boring..oops..too late!! ;)" Same kind of "you're acting stupid, shut up" attitude.
Click to expand...

again, Sniffles brings nothing to the table as far as the discussion is concerned and instead tries to attack posters who are involving themselves in the discussion!! Much liek yourself!! Sniffles response I was referring to tend to pop up quite a bit around the forum, hence my reference to it getting boring!!

Throwing your toys out of the pram and trying to play the victim is really not a great way of dealing with debate!!" Attack their sense of maturity, call them children.
Click to expand...

No, it is a fact!! It is exactly what the person was doing!! If they do not want to be referred to in such a manner then they need to act in a manner not warranting the comparison!!

Wow, another statement devoid of substance!!" Not a comment directed specifically at a poster, but an example of appeal to ridicule. That's one of your favorite things to do.
Click to expand...

So, it wasn't an insult at all!! Just an observation that was in fact correct!!

Your comments are uninformed and inaccurate, but that does not really matter to trolls!!" Call them a troll.
Click to expand...

Seeing as you have refused to discuss the topic and concentrated your posts to trying to annoy me, you are a troll!! Sometimes the truth hurts!! It is hard to debate an argument with someone who offers none!! You have not participated in the topic of discussion so you cannot be debated on the subject!! In fact, you really have had no place posting in this thread and all your posts and replies to your trollign should have been split out as they offer nothing to the debate at all!!

You haven't called anyone a son of a bitch or directly said "you're a stupid sack of crap". It's more subtle than that, a result of your hyper-aggressive "debating" style, where when you aren't angrily quoting yourself you're letting the forum know what illogical, shady, ignorant, stupid peons the people who differ in opinion from you are. You aren't technically guilty of flaming, but you are guilty of being an insufferable ass.
Click to expand...

Angrily quoting myself?! There is nothing in this game that can make me angry, it is a game!! If you want to knock me off my pedestal, then shoot my reasoning and argument down!! If you can't, stop whining about it!! If I'm not guilty of flaming then what the hell are you complaining about?! You have accused me of insulting people, which would be flaming but now you say I'm not flaming and that you just consider me an "insufferable ass"?!

In fact, if you look at the poll thread, a number of people have posted thoughts that, while not in agreeance with mine, I can see why they think that way and have acknowledged that!!

I do assume people can defend their arguments or points of view if they enter a debate!! I do expect people to read up on the issue before adding to the discussion and therefore do not expect to have to repeat things to people who are just too lazy to read the previous posts in a thread!! If people want to attack my point of view, then provide some reasoning for it!! Personal reasons is not a reason when talking about a private RA chamber!! Quite frankly, it sounds like a cop out!!

So, again, I extend the invitation to you do contribute to the actual topic of discussion!! The Private forum for the RA!!
 
Excellent. Now that the thread has been re-opened, I'd like to propose that any legislative proposal asking for a private RA forum also include general guidelines on what type of topics are appropriate for this forum, just to be clear when we actually write the law.

For example, something like: "This forum shall be used for sensitive topics, including matters of regional security, foreign affairs, and others that require debate free from outside influences. Threads in the private forum that are not of this nature shall be moved to the public RA forum immediately."
 
I'm not sure an official proposal has been put forward, it seemed to be an enquiry as to why we are doing what we are doing at the moment!!

I'm sure GM could make a formal proposal on the subject but I think he was just askign a question at the moment to see what people thought!!
 
wizardofoz01:
Excellent. Now that the thread has been re-opened, I'd like to propose that any legislative proposal asking for a private RA forum also include general guidelines on what type of topics are appropriate for this forum, just to be clear when we actually write the law.

For example, something like: "This forum shall be used for sensitive topics, including matters of regional security, foreign affairs, and others that require debate free from outside influences. Threads in the private forum that are not of this nature shall be moved to the public RA forum immediately."
Click to expand...
Would it be more appropriate to specify which absolutely must be put into a public forum, say "formal discussions" and (if anyone thinks it appropriate) purely domestic topics of legislation under consideration or if consideration of a Constitutional amendment gets to the point where specific text is being proposed.

--Just my first impression of how we would draw a line between formal and informal debate.
 
Unterwasserseestaat:
Would it be more appropriate to specify which absolutely must be put into a public forum, say "formal discussions" and (if anyone thinks it appropriate) purely domestic topics of legislation under consideration  or if consideration of a Constitutional amendment gets to the point where specific text is being proposed.

--Just my first impression of how we would draw a line between formal and informal debate.
Click to expand...
I prefer different approach when specifying what should be public and what should not. If there is ever going to be legislation on this matter, I propose that all the discussion should be public if not specified as classified or sensitive. (as the alternative would be "basically classified, if not specified as public").
 
I don't believe we should say specifically what hsould be in the PUBLIC forum -- that should be common sense.

We should outline what sort of topics should go in the PRIVATE forum so people are clear on what the private forum should be used for.

I think GM's idea has merit and I don't want to see this die without an attempt at a solid proposal put forward.

If we create a private RA forum, we should at least say a few words on what topics of discussion should be in that forum.
 
wizardofoz01:
I don't believe we should say specifically what hsould be in the PUBLIC forum -- that should be common sense.

We should outline what sort of topics should go in the PRIVATE forum so people are clear on what the private forum should be used for.

I think GM's idea has merit and I don't want to see this die without an attempt at a solid proposal put forward.

If we create a private RA forum, we should at least say a few words on what topics of discussion should be in that forum.
Click to expand...
Well, in my opinion, since we are in a state of "war" currently with some that are taking an active part on this forum, I believe issues like the recent vote to eject Ultra Dry should be private. Items such as that are matters of regional security and since they are being passed to the Regional Assembly for assessment and decision we should not have to worry about outside interjection in other arenas because of our actions there.

I believe Poltsamaa provided a more comprehensive list earlier in the thread regarding potential items that should not necessarily be for the "external" public.

Since this is an internal structure of the forum via Regional Assembly decision does it need anything more than Speaker approval? Is a referendum necessary for a forum maintenance issue? (Just curious on the consensus on this. It is my opinion that it does not but others have expressed possible concern and belief that a formal vote is needed.)
 
The Speaker would be within his rights to simply request that the admins open a sub-forum to his specifications. Since there has been debate on both sides of the issue, I think the Wiz's desire to have the RA approve it by a formal vote is very much in keeping with the spirit of TNP.
 
Very well.

Therefore...

"I, The Minister, ruler of Gracius Maximus, formally request that the Regional Assembly of the north Pacific be granted a private forum, visible to only those nations that are part of the Regional Assembly and its extensions (Diplomatic Corps, Cabinet officials and deputies, NPA, members of the Judiciary, Vice Delegate and Delegate) so that the business of the region might be discussed, if so desired, in private without the preview or observation of outside forces or concerns. I request that the Speaker of the Assembly open an official poll on the issue that involves both poll voting and a corresponding post of affirmation."
 
Cool your jets hotshot, as much as I find myself agreeing with you since the flood of Lexiconians have swarmed in, I'm pretty sure we'd need Hersfold to provide the technical knowhow to actualize such a proposal.
 
mr_sniffles:
Cool your jets hotshot, as much as I find myself agreeing with you since the flood of Lexiconians have swarmed in, I'm pretty sure we'd need Hersfold to provide the technical knowhow to actualize such a proposal.
Click to expand...
There are two admins on this forum and it requires very very little technical "know how".
 
Gracius Maximus:
Very well.

Therefore...

"I, The Minister, ruler of Gracius Maximus, formally request that the Regional Assembly of the north Pacific be granted a private forum, visible to only those nations that are part of the Regional Assembly and its extensions (Diplomatic Corps, Cabinet officials and deputies, NPA, members of the Judiciary, Vice Delegate and Delegate) so that the business of the region might be discussed, if so desired, in private without the preview or observation of outside forces or concerns. I request that the Speaker of the Assembly open an official poll on the issue that involves both poll voting and a corresponding post of affirmation."
Click to expand...
Alright. I will create a poll topic and list the "rules" for such a vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top