Lexiconian Applications

Great Bights Mum:
Nope. I could ban either Unter or FEC but not both. And I have Truckler status, which is two above Minnow. They are either Handshakers or Duckspeakers.
Click to expand...
Also, for the first few weeks of your delegacy weren't you still at minnow status? (not actually sure about this one). What do you think you could have done then?
 
I was a minnow for about the first month. When I first became Delegate I was not able to ban Unter. Not that I would ever want to...
 
I believe as time passes, they will become even more significant, and those with very high influence levels will become more secure in thier homeland.
 
Alrighty ladies and gents. We're going to have 2 votes in succession, right? Or maybe simultaneously? Approve the Oath Amendment and open up RA applications.

And just to make sure we're clear, initially I have to have a thread for ALL people to reaffirm their RA membership status. Which means poking Hersfold to send out a mass email and then some mass PMs to the membership poking them.

So, what have we decided on suspicious applications? Or even those that are *currently* in the RA that appear to be the same person? Are we going to call them on the new oath? Ask them not to reapply?
 
We better do some vote counting on the oath amendment in the RA. It requires a 2/3rd majority to pass theree, and if abstentions are counted in determining the percentage, itis very, very close.

Assuming that passes, Hers is aware of the directive in the amendment for a suspension mask for RA members.

If the amendment passes the RA and then comes to the Cabinet as the last step for adoption, we will have 15 days to have a Cabinet majority approve ir, and at that time it would take effect.

That is when the seven day "safe harbor" period begins for current RA members to take the amended oath. After that seven day safe harbor period ends, all other RA members would receive the restricted mask.

We have some control as a body as to exactly when the Cabinet vote is posted publicly in that 15 day period, thus, we can co-ordinate the timing.of when current RA members start taking the amended oath.

Also at that time, we would have to require all applicants to take the amended oath, otherwise if they are admitted to the RA they would be restricted until the amended oath is taken by the applicants for the RA.

We should complete the purge of the member list for those with a RA mask who do not have a nation on record with the MIIA that exists outside TNP or is CTE.

Then we can plan the mass PMs and or emails to the other folks who current have a mask with access to the RA. That includes those with the various other governmental masks, btw, including all of us here in the Cabinet. Where would we want to put the thread for recording the amended oath?

As to the Lexiconian applications, it seems to me that a majority of the Cabinet has endorsed Flem's proposal as to how to deal with those, and I suspect that none can be followed before the amendment is implemented.

If the amendment does not have enough votes to pass, I think there is a way to use the operative language as a definition of treason, which can be adopted as a law, and attach a penalty and a exception to the general statute of limitation to it.

EDIT fix typos (some of which are caused by the spellchecker built into the new version of Firefox) and add line spaces for Eras. :bunny: :P
 
third, we require that for every Lexicon citizen admitted to our RA that we are permitted to admit the same number of TNP citizens to their rolls, etc., etc., tit for tat.
Click to expand...

The problem with that is that the lexicon have many more levels of power than we have. "Lexiconians" have no real power at all, and the senate seemingly little more. Real power is in the hands of the founders (unelected and pretty much unaccountable except to other founders) and High Council.

On the other hand our RA have real power and a relatively small number could easily change the course of this region's government - a fact not lost on the Lexicon when they hatched their little plot with Limitless Events.

On another matter, the discussion I have read above about influence and booting ability makes me think: Perhaps under this new system the delegacy system we devised under the old system is not as secure as we might hope. I had always thought that our delegate could boot the higher endotarts.

If not, then we are surely, somewhere down the line, storing up trouble for ourselves?
 
flemingovia:
On another matter, the discussion I have read above about influence and booting ability makes me think: Perhaps under this new system the delegacy system we devised under the old system is not as secure as we might hope. I had always thought that our delegate could boot the higher endotarts.

If not, then we are surely, somewhere down the line, storing up trouble for ourselves?
Click to expand...
Actually, the delegate's inability to boot all the high-influence endotarts is good for us, as it provides some protection for us against a rogue delegate. So long as we have a collection of known and loyal members with high influence levels, we always have a bit of insurance against some crazy delegate. The best defense against nefarious activities may simply be for people to start amassing and maintaining relatively high endocounts.
 
Yes it seems sensible to me, if you have a 'hardcore' of trusted TNP members with high endorsement counts and high influence then even if an elected rogue Delegate or endotart got the Delegacy then they wouldn't be able to eject the 'hardcore' and would soon be overtaken before they could do too much damage.

On another note Blackshear and Frejmark both hold Truckler status.
 
Grosse, you ever think about putting a few lines between your paragraphs? Pretty please? ;)
Grosseschnauzer:
If the amendment passes the RA and then comes to the Cabinet as the last step for adoption, we will have 15 days to have a Cabinet majority approve ir, and at that time it would take effect. That is when the seven day "safe harbor" periof begins for current RA members to take the amended oath. after that seven day safe harbor period ends, all other RA members would receive the restricted mask.
Click to expand...
I was hoping for this as soon as possible in order to get people processed that have applied, like Chapstickisfun.
we should complete the purge of the member list for those with a RA mask who do not have a nation on record with the MIA that exists outside TNP or is CTE. Then we can plan the mass PMs and or emails to the other folks who current have a mask with access to the RA. That includes those with the various other governmental masks, btw, including all of us here in the Cabinet.
Click to expand...
Do you want a purge before or after the mass PMs? I was honestly thinking it could just happen after, and therefore happen naturally.
Where would we want to put the thread for recording the amended oath?
Click to expand...
In the MoIIA office... no? Along with a new RA signup with the new oath.
 
Emperor Matthuis:
On another note Blackshear and Frejmark both hold Truckler status.
Click to expand...
While we're at it. :P

#1 Unterwasserseestaat 297 736 Duckspeaker
Former English Colony 257 877 Duckspeaker
#3 Kitabo 232 490 Handshaker
#4 Frejmark 206 361 Truckler
Black Shear 187 378 Truckler
Great Bights Mum 415 823 Truckler
#7 Groovistan 124 216 Vassal
Dipsomaniatron 151 274 Vassal
 
Former English Colony:
Grosse, you ever think about putting a few lines between your paragraphs?  Pretty please? ;)
Click to expand...
It was a combination of being rushed since I was about to leave for a few hours, and I wanted to post a summary of where things stood looking at all of the issues that are involved (and noting the timing in RL due to the US holiday, and the way the one week safe harbor would play out if we have it overlapping with this next week to ten days. Some folks travel away for the week.)

And in proofing it just now, I realized that the new spellchecker function in version 2.0 of Firefox sometimes changes things in ways I never anticipated when I type a typo!

I was hoping for this as soon as possible in order to get people processed that have applied, like Chapstickisfun.
[
Click to expand...

Voting period doesn't end until late Saturday IIRC. So the Cabinet can't vote on the amendment until Sunday. We should time thefirst PMs or emails to go out at the time the Cabinet approves that amendment, so we explain what is involved and why.

Purging the RA lists of the CTEs soonerwould shorten the list of those who need to have emails or PMs sent to them. And We need to have Hersfold update the RA masking to remove all of those who should have been purged before this.
 
Former English Colony:
Hersfold:
And We need to have Hersfold update the RA masking to remove all of those who should have been purged before this.
Click to expand...

Waiting to be told who.
Click to expand...
Grosse, may I give Hers a list? I'll leave off anyone who people still believe is playing the game, even if they have a nation elsewhere. Give them a chance to show up again.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, deadwood is deadwood, whether it's cut out now or later.
 
Okay, people have been chopped off, the Oath renewal has started, and a new signup has been posted and all unfinished applicants PMed and told to post again.

But we have not voted to reopen the RA application process. Can one be started tomorrow? And what were we doing again with the Lexis? >_>
 
flemingovia:
I feel we should ask the Lexiconians to withdraw their RA applications. Their response to that should tell us a lot about their motives. If they will not withdraw their applications, then they should be denied for the reasons Hersfold gave above.
Click to expand...
Hersfold:
Eras, for the time being, it may be best to simply deny any applications from known Lexiconers (or those who have been deemed connected to the lex via a security check), due to "ongoing investigations into regional security caused by recent events." Or something like that.
Click to expand...

That answers your last question; as to the other two?

Eras, I think the Cabinet vote should be on the following:

That the Cabinet agrees to allow applications for RA membership to be processed and accepted --
1- as long as security checks show that the applicant does not have any identified connection to the Lexicon, and
2-- As to the Lexiconian-related applications, we should ask for the applications to be withdrawn; and if such applications are not withdrawn then they will be denied on the basis that "there is an ongoing investigation into regional security caused by recent events."

Given the instructions and requests that have been given to the MIIA, the NPIA, and the AG, that statement would in fact be accurate.

Will a vote on that suffice?
 
I'm bumping this thread up and I am going to pin it so that the Cabinet votes on the motion stated in my immediately previous post.

This got put aside because of the Speaker's decision to re-open the vote on the oath amendment. Now that the amendment has again passed the Regional Assembly and the Cabinet, we need to vote on this.

Former English Colony, is there anything that needs to be changed in the motion?
 
Pardon me but, I really don't like the phrase "ongoing investigation into regional security". That sounds like something from a murder mystery show, you know the one's that very soon after are marked cold case and unsolvable.

I believe what we need is a forward, solid statement than affirms our position and not any of this pussy footing around the issue. Again, we really need to either recognize that either we are in a state of conflict with The Lexicon or not because, either way, if we continue to mistreat this issue and avoid it they will view it as an act of open hostilities.
 
I agree with BW on this. What ongoing investigation? If the person is shown to have been a Lexi member or *is* a current member, what's to investigate? Either you bar their access on the basis of the oath or a declared war or it's not really a viable solution. I don't really want the Lexis in TNP, but I don't think we have a lot of basis to keep them out. Both sides have declared the war over and done with. Unless they can be shown to be in violation of the oath, I'm not sure what I can realistically stop them for. Not that that means I'll just approve all of them right off the bat, but someone honestly should file a lawsuit if we use such an excuse. :P
 
The wording I suggested for the motion was based on the suggestions and comments made by the other members of the Cabinet at that time in response to your request.

If you have an alternate suggestion, let's put it on the table. I cannot read people's minds, only what they say. The way I worded that motion was my impression of what a majority wanted to cover in that motion. so, as I said, if you've got a preferable alternate, lay it out!
 
The question surely comes down to this: The war may have been declared over, but has the conflict ended?

Recent events have caused me to suspect that the conflict is not, in fact, over. They have stopped the unendorsement campaign, but that had stopped long before the war was declared ended. But there were other dimensions to the conflict as well:

The ban on TNP members in the channel #the_lexicon has not only been confirmed, it has been extended to cover ALL tnp government members.

The ban on TNP members on the lexicon forum has not been lifted. I appealed against my ban to Fullhead Land two and a half weeks ago, and he has blown me off several times. I have appealed to Cartwrightia, another admin, and he has not even (yet) replied. I did not see any point in appealing to IP or Cathyy.

Now if we accept lexiconians who have applied or are likely to, and add those to the Lexis already in the RA (including the undeclared ones we know of), we have a block of about 15ish voters. That is enough to sway pretty much any election, any vote. We have already seen in the recent oath ammendment vote that lexiconians vote as a bloc - none of the lexis voted in favour or abstained. They all voted nay.

We have recently seen that the lexiconians would be happy to see a regime change in TNP. None of the High Council - not one - hesitated when Limitless events offered them the chance to take over this region. Is there anyone here who honestly believes that, if the chance were to present itself again, the lexicon would not leap at the opportunity if it were to present itself again?

If you just answered "no, I believe they would take the chance" then you conclude, like me, that the war may be over, but the conflict is not.
 
Firstly I would point out that Cartwrightia is a junior Admin and won't risk doing anything that the Founders wouldn't want him to do.

I would like Flem still oppose Lexiconians being admitted in the RA, they remain openly hostile to us and although there are few I would let in, you cannot pick and choose RA applications like that.

If we accept them in in an election in the future it is completely possible that they could for example vote in one of them as a Delegate and then we would be completely stuck with the uneviable dilemma of having to give control of the region to a former enemy or break the democratic system that people in this region have worked so hard to create.

I would be for a simple blanket ban on all Lexiconians or as previously suggest do what they do to us and fog us off.
 
flemingovia:
We have already seen in the recent oath ammendment vote that lexiconians vote as a bloc - none of the lexis voted in favour or abstained. They all voted nay.
Click to expand...

I would like to make two points, the first starts with a question. Just how many Lexicons are currently RA's? I am really only aware of one but perhaps there are two of them? Hardly a statistic that can be used to judge an entire region.

My second point is, Flem, they voted no because if they voted yes they knew we would throw them out of the RA because, clearly, TNP still thinks there is an "undeclared war" going on otherwise we wouldn't be holdig this decussion or, for that matter, voting on a new oath aimed at keeping Lexicons out of TNP.

I don't know about you but if someone handed me an amendment that basically boiled down to "Get kicked out of the RA and possibility the region Or Dont"...I'm willing to bet I would vote against it...sort of a no brainer...
 
I've already stated publicly that there appeared to be a clear attempt by lexiconians to influence the vote on the oath amendment, once they intimidated mr. Sniffles into reopening the vote, after the Cabinet had approved it, and the implementation had begun.

Go look at the list of those who voted initially after that voting thread was re=opened. How many of them voted in the election three weeks ago? It does not take a genius to realize that some kind of force was in play drawing in nations that had not really been participating in the RA, suddenly show up to vote on this measure?

After taking office, I asked the Attorney General to review any and all evidence concerning the Limitless Events affair and determine if there is enough evidence for indictments. I plan to ask for that investigation to be expanded to look at the efforts to influence the outcome of that particular vote. I'm also going to ask that the MIIA and the NPIA assist in this matter, and perhaps other ministries as well. So as far as I am concerned, there is an ongoing investigation of the situation surrounding the Lexiconians, and until we can say we've gotten to the bottom of it, that investigation will continue.

The reality is that the Lexiconians continue to interfere in TNP, whether its a state of declared war or not. It's definitely not a hot war, it's definitely not a warm peace -- it's something else. And we're going to have to devote time and resources to deal with their continuing interference. But I will not allow them to distract the region from doing what we need to do to protect ourselves from subversion in a totally legal, constitutional manner. Nor will I allow them to distract us from other priorities that are as important.

We still need to resolve the status of those applications. The question remains, what is the motion that FEC wants us to vote on? What is the motion the rest of the voting members of the Cabinet want us to vote on? That is the quetion I ask of the voting mebers of the Cabinet.
 
For the *immediate* time, I wouldn't mind a simple mandate to approve people that have no known ties to the Lexicon and to postpone applications from people that have ties to the Lexicon.

As to the specific matter of the Lexiconians, if someone actually made a declaration (whole cabinet or PM) publically similar to what Grosse and Flem have said here, is it possible to set up a review process via the cabinet? Given the "declared or not" portion of the new clause, there'd be sufficient cause to at least review it in more detail.
 
It does not take a genius to realize that some kind of force was in play drawing in nations that had not really been participating in the RA, suddenly show up to vote on this measure?
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean nations like...Pope Hope? Your right, there was a force in play; I'm just not sure it was the Lexicon leading it.

I think this entire issue is overshadowing the larger picture. The real concern here, the real thick of the matter is that any region could send people into TNP to become RV members. Hell, I have 15 members in LWU I could rely and call upon and guess what? Lone Wolves and TNP isn't at war so those troops could practically give you the bird, even with the new oath, and easily pull off the same plot Limitless and the Lexi's tried.

That’s what really needs to be addressed instead of hyper focusing on ways to keep only the Lexis out while dropping your pants to every other potential threat.
 
Firstly I would point out that Cartwrightia is a junior Admin and won't risk doing anything that the Founders wouldn't want him to do.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am discovering that Fullhead Land cannot clean his own backside without Insane Power around to tell him whether to wipe forwards or backwards either.

Poor lad seems paralysed by indecision.
 
Blue Wolf, the topic of this thread is the Lexiconian applications, and not others.

You make assumptions that aren't warranted by the facts (such as assuming that other potential threats are being ignored.) If you are as serious about wanting to see other devices put into place, then put those specific ideas in another Cabinet thread and put them out there for discussion.

I suspect that what went on in that RA vote is that one group went out and got all of its allies to show up to vote even though they've not participated in the RA before, and then someone or two went out and got just enough votes in on the other side to counterbalance.

This does not change the fact that there were forces that wanted to interfere, and did interfere, in our region's internal decision-making. (As to Pope Hope, she's had a RA membership for a long time, and although she didn't vote in the last election, she had voted in earlier elections and votes. So she's a poor example for you to point to this time around.)

Now getting back to the actual topic at hand. If I understand FEC correctly, she wants something like this (and FEC, correct me if I misunderstand):

1. The MIIA and the other regional officials involved with the process are authorized to resume processing Regional Assembly membership application.
2. The MIIA and the other regional officials involved with the process may defer any application that they deem require further investigation and request that investigation.
3. The Cabinet affirns that while a state of declared war does not currently exist, there is evidence that leads the Cabinet to believe that an undeclared state of conflict exists and that these hostilities continue to be waged by the Lexicon and its allies against The North Pacific.
4. The MIIA and other regional officials involved with the process may bring any applications that are investigated to the Cabinet for review and discussion before action is taken on the application. Participation in those discussions will be limited to the voting members of the Cabinet (and does not include their deputies) as well as those officials who participate in any investigation.

Good? Need change? How should it be changed?
 
Grosseschnauzer:
I've already stated publicly that there appeared to be a clear attempt by lexiconians to influence the vote on the oath amendment, once they intimidated mr. Sniffles into reopening the vote, after the Cabinet had approved it, and the implementation had begun.
Click to expand...
Intimidation? Without even paying that close of attention, 2 of the 3 people who I heard (either directly or indirectly) bring that particular issue of just happening to close the vote unconstitutionally early were not Lexiconians, the third being Eluvatar.

As Blue Wolf said, the Lexiconians had every reason to vote against that amendment, given that it was pretty obviously targeted specifically at them. And I don't believe it was the Lexiconian calling in favors or trying to scrounge up more votes to sway the vote their way, either.

Either declare a state of conflict and, thusly, no lexis, or allow them in. Either way, work towards finding a real solution to a the real issue, and not just patching it up or sweeping it under the rug.
 
Grosseschnauzer:
1. The MIIA and the other regional officials involved with the process are authorized to resume processing Regional Assembly membership application.
2. The MIIA and the other regional officials involved with the process may defer any application that they deem require further investigation and request that investigation.
3. The Cabinet affirns that while a state of declared war does not currently exist, there is evidence that leads the Cabinet to believe that an undeclared state of conflict exists and that these hostilities continue to be waged by the Lexicon and its allies against The North Pacific.
4. The MIIA and other regional officials involved with the process may bring any applications that are investigated to the Cabinet for review and discussion before action is taken on the application. Participation in those discussions will be limited to the voting members of the Cabinet (and does not include their deputies) as well as those officials who participate in any investigation.

Good? Need change? How should it be changed?
Click to expand...
I quite like those. As long as someone says it would be legal (and I think it is under the review guidelines), I'd be comfortable doing it. The real question is what happens after a certain amount of time in an investigation? I don't think it should last extremely long, so what does an actual investigation entail? :P
 
We will probably have to discuss this with the MoEA, the MoD, the AG, and the NPIA; so they need to comment as soon as possible.

The undercurrent of this situation is such that until there is a clearer picture of what may need to be done to investigate and review applications and any of those folks might be needing to do it -- I don't have a real feel just yet on the time element.
(And we will be dealing with the crazier RL schedules folks tend to have this time of year.)
I think we do need a process where the NPIA, MoD/NPA, MIIA, MoEA, and AG all have a chance to sign off or indicate that an application needs further review, then give those agencies a chance to do whatever they need to do. At that point the elected voting members of the Cabinet can come in and review the information and make the best decision we can based on what has been found in the course of the investigation.


Notwithstanding BW's and Heft's opinions about this, I stand by my understanding of the current state of affairs. It's ridiculous to demand that we say black or white, when we're dealing with all sorts of shades of gray.
 
Looks fine to me. I still think the LExis should be invited to withdraw their RA applications until such time as a relationship of trust has built up between our regions.

That would be a voluntary gesture of goodwill on their part, and would do much to ease tensions.
 
I would like to make two points, the first starts with a question. Just how many Lexicons are currently RA's? I am really only aware of one but perhaps there are two of them? Hardly a statistic that can be used to judge an entire region
Click to expand...

There are AT LEAST five that I can name off the top of my head.

EDIT: There are also a further three that I have strong suspicions about, but no concrete proof.
 
Obvious Lexi's are Fulhead Land and nish81 - others include Heroic Parody (which is probably a duplicate). I can't name any others off the top of my head, but I'm quite certain there are others. I just can't place them at the moment.

As said before, I can run a security sweep based on IP address and e-mail. I can also collect a list of Lexiconian Citizens to compare against our RA list again - the one we have at present is a tad out of date. Anyone who appears on that list should be of obvious suspicion. Unfortunately and obviously, the list doesn't include IP addresses or email, so I'll have a hard time matching anyone up with a false name based on that alone. I can possibly pull the e-mails of some off the board, but certaintly not all.
 
Obvious Lexi's are Fulhead Land and nish81
Click to expand...

But wasn't Nish an RA in TNP before she joined The Lexicon? I'm almost certain she was...but yes, no one is questioning that Fulhead is a Lexi...well except the courts :P

I can't name any others off the top of my head, but I'm quite certain there are others. I just can't place them at the moment.
Click to expand...

I don't know...that’s sort of shaky proof to be throwing around as evidence of a conspiracy. I mean, either you know there are others and you have names with concert proof or your don't, no if, ands, or buts about that.

Looks fine to me. I still think the LExis should be invited to withdraw their RA applications until such time as a relationship of trust has built up between our regions.
Click to expand...

Is that really going to help? Are you really going to stand down and accept Lexicons into TNP because they unbanned you or let TNPers into #The_Lexicon? I mean, I am unbanned in The Lex and #The_Lexicon but that’s only because Cathyy and IP stopped their superimposed grudge and the new government realized that if you want to ally and raid with LWU you actually have to unban their leader. My experience is that The Lexi’s only do things when it benefits them.

Truth be told any region could do what the lexicon tried to do, what we need is not a new oaths, what we need are new voting rules when it comes to the delegate elections.
 
No. Nish is one of the longest standing lexiconians. he is enrolled as a lexiconian at #3 after Insane Power and Cathyy, but before Wilkshire and Fullhead Land even. He has been in Lexicon from the beginning. Not surprising, since he was NPD/G before that.

But, for the record, I am coming to agree with you on the voting issue. Maybe we need two chambers - one which is open to all, like the RA at the moment, one which is more carefully selective. Most regions, including the Lexicon, seem to operate a similar system.
 
I think there will be a lot of resistance to a second chamber, but keep in mind that delegate elections requires UN membership in the region above and beyond RA membership. What may fly is some other additional requirement in addition to UN membership to vote for Delegate.

I'm sure Hersfold and others who strongly supported the RA/RV merger would be resistant to re-dividing that group.

But that's a side issue to deciding whether to accept the procedure I suggested a few posts above. FEC, would you still be willing to have invites to Lexiconians to withdraw?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top