Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
Ah, I thought it was just a failure to update, apologies.
I have former Delegate of The North Pacific in my signature for that very same reason.
Security Council
- Thread starter Gracius Maximus
- Start date
I have former Delegate of The North Pacific in my signature for that very same reason.
Outer Kharkistania
TNPer
Indeed. I'm not entirely sure why I still have Cabinet Masking, but I'm not gonna argue with it.
I guess I'm a member at large now, who just hangs out in the Cabinet Lounge and refuses to leave.
I guess I'm a member at large now, who just hangs out in the Cabinet Lounge and refuses to leave.
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
I am quoting this because I don't want it lost in the shuffle of off-topic comments from myself and others and would like to know what Gross, mr sniffles and GBM, who were the primary spokespeople against endorsement caps, think of the changes.
mr_sniffles
TNPer
Um... No. I feel you should lower the minimum needs to above minnow and jettison the whole percentage based endo cap.
Also monthly change is too soon. Just make it as required.
Also monthly change is too soon. Just make it as required.
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
The change in Influence level was prompted by GBM's comment that it is conceivable that a member of the Council with high endorsements could fall from Vassal to Minnow.
So no endorsement cap at all? I provided for it to be a recommendation and a loophole for Council members to vote themselves excluded from it but don't you think there should be some basic suggested guidelines?
I can adjust the Regional Assembly vote easily enough.
R
Romanoffia (Guest)
Guest
I think influence levels as a requirement for any office position is somewhat elitist - in the sense that some people with low 'influence' have been in the region longer than some with higher influence levels - those influence levels having been reduced by service in the military or other service that required movement of a given nation.
This is especially true since a CLO member is entrusted with the requisite authority based upon that member's judgmental ability and not influence level.
While I'm not averse to a merit system per se, some nations that have never engaged in regional politics or government at all have extremely high 'influence' levels. Using influence levels as a form of merit isn't effective unless you are talking about the Delegate or who is in the line of succession to delegate.
If we're talking about having regional security as a prime motive here, what we might want to look at is an 'Emergency Delegate' in the form of a nation with high 'influence' that can rapidly assume the Delegacy in the event that there is a pressing need for a Delegate with a high influence level. Perhaps establish a 'War Delegate Nation' to be swapped in the event such a measure is needed?
Just a thought.
This is especially true since a CLO member is entrusted with the requisite authority based upon that member's judgmental ability and not influence level.
While I'm not averse to a merit system per se, some nations that have never engaged in regional politics or government at all have extremely high 'influence' levels. Using influence levels as a form of merit isn't effective unless you are talking about the Delegate or who is in the line of succession to delegate.
If we're talking about having regional security as a prime motive here, what we might want to look at is an 'Emergency Delegate' in the form of a nation with high 'influence' that can rapidly assume the Delegacy in the event that there is a pressing need for a Delegate with a high influence level. Perhaps establish a 'War Delegate Nation' to be swapped in the event such a measure is needed?
Just a thought.
Outer Kharkistania
TNPer
Isn't that what the Vice Delegate is for?
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
In the event that an elected Delegate decides to disregard the Constitution it will not matter who the Vice Delegate is since that nation would very likely be the first nation removed from the region.
The purpose of having a Council dedicated primarily to the monitoring of the overall Influence level of the region and the overall endorsement security of same is so that those members can work in cooperation with one another under the auspices of the Constitution as it exists in such an event.
This codifies it so that there can be no question of continuity in such an event.
I am perhaps uniquely qualified to speak on such circumstances and the mentality that often accompanies them. After all, I have led three separate feeder coups personally over my history and participated in at least half a dozen others in which I offered advise and support behind the scenes.
It happens.
The purpose of having a Council dedicated primarily to the monitoring of the overall Influence level of the region and the overall endorsement security of same is so that those members can work in cooperation with one another under the auspices of the Constitution as it exists in such an event.
This codifies it so that there can be no question of continuity in such an event.
I am perhaps uniquely qualified to speak on such circumstances and the mentality that often accompanies them. After all, I have led three separate feeder coups personally over my history and participated in at least half a dozen others in which I offered advise and support behind the scenes.
It happens.
mr_sniffles
TNPer
I'm fine with the above vassal standing, and the bill as long as Section One is amended as needed and not monthly also elimination of any percentage based cap.
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
So how is this:
Al Homa
TNPer
I have to admit, I am also not completely happy with influence levels being a requirement. What if, due to real life reasons, one of the members had to remove themselve from the game for a month and their nation ceased to exist. Would, upon their return, they been removed from the Council purely for having real life commitments. I think it would be unjustified to do so.
We've had lots of problems with the small print of positional requirements in the past few months. Do others not think we are simply creating an unnecessary requirement that we will later regret. I appreciate the reasons for such a clause to be included but could we look outside of game mechanics, like we do with the delegacy and all other official positions, for positional qualifications. An example might be recognised regional membership for over a year, if we are fearful of outside forces ascending to such a powerful position in future?
We've had lots of problems with the small print of positional requirements in the past few months. Do others not think we are simply creating an unnecessary requirement that we will later regret. I appreciate the reasons for such a clause to be included but could we look outside of game mechanics, like we do with the delegacy and all other official positions, for positional qualifications. An example might be recognised regional membership for over a year, if we are fearful of outside forces ascending to such a powerful position in future?
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
Influence is important because it matters to the given situation that the Security Council exists to enforce.
You can not discount Influence when considering this particular issue because there will never be a group of Minnows capable of enforcing the policy if necessary. The Council must have nations with mid to high levels of Influence in order to be effective in the event a Delegate goes against the Constitution.
Without consideration of Influence this serves no purpose whatsoever.
Forensatha
TNPer
Considering that endorsements are a requirement to get the necessary influence in any reasonable amount of time, I will have to say I agree this would increase endotarting.
Plus, I do not understand why both the amendment and the law have to list influence requirements.
And, finally, I'll point out that the concern over influence doesn't actually mean the council will be effective. The high influence requirements and RA membership automatically means membership will be very low. Realistically, if any invaders successfully overthrow the delegate, there's really not much which will prevent prevent them from tossing out the entire Security Council before it even has a chance to react. They can just trade delegacy with another member of the invasion party to recoup influence. And if the delegate goes mad with power, these are certainly the first people who'd have to find a new home.
If anything, this would be too ineffective to be of use. Eluvatar's version is a lot more effective, in that it combines the possibility of more members with working with long-term members of the region who might have an interest but would never be in the RA. It would be a lot harder to kick out those who meet the requirements for that, since there's more of them.
Honestly, I would rather see the next version of Eluvatar's at this time.
Plus, I do not understand why both the amendment and the law have to list influence requirements.
And, finally, I'll point out that the concern over influence doesn't actually mean the council will be effective. The high influence requirements and RA membership automatically means membership will be very low. Realistically, if any invaders successfully overthrow the delegate, there's really not much which will prevent prevent them from tossing out the entire Security Council before it even has a chance to react. They can just trade delegacy with another member of the invasion party to recoup influence. And if the delegate goes mad with power, these are certainly the first people who'd have to find a new home.
If anything, this would be too ineffective to be of use. Eluvatar's version is a lot more effective, in that it combines the possibility of more members with working with long-term members of the region who might have an interest but would never be in the RA. It would be a lot harder to kick out those who meet the requirements for that, since there's more of them.
Honestly, I would rather see the next version of Eluvatar's at this time.
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
Actually, no, there is no limit on membership and the membership requirements in this version are actually less strict than in the previous one so that arguement makes no sense.
Also, and I can not fault you for not knowing the limitations of the Influence system as you have probably had limited interaction with it, but any single member of the Council can not conceivably eject and ban every other member.
The current Delegate, for example, could expend most of its Influence in ejecting and banning either GBM or FEC but not both and he wouldn't be able to follow that up with the removal of Kitabo, Tresville, Unter or any of the other "trusted" nations with high levels of Influence.
Likewise, even if the "strongest" Influence nation, which I believe is GBM gained the Delegacy and decided to go rogue it would not be able to eject and ban more than one or two of the other members of the Council, even if it only had four members, without using too much of its Influence to offset the swapping that would likely occur with the other members.
There would be no possible way for a Delegate to remain a rogue in power for long with such a system in place. This effectively places the limits on the Delegate that the offsite constructs have tried to place on them for years without success through ingame mechanics.
Also, and I can not fault you for not knowing the limitations of the Influence system as you have probably had limited interaction with it, but any single member of the Council can not conceivably eject and ban every other member.
The current Delegate, for example, could expend most of its Influence in ejecting and banning either GBM or FEC but not both and he wouldn't be able to follow that up with the removal of Kitabo, Tresville, Unter or any of the other "trusted" nations with high levels of Influence.
Likewise, even if the "strongest" Influence nation, which I believe is GBM gained the Delegacy and decided to go rogue it would not be able to eject and ban more than one or two of the other members of the Council, even if it only had four members, without using too much of its Influence to offset the swapping that would likely occur with the other members.
There would be no possible way for a Delegate to remain a rogue in power for long with such a system in place. This effectively places the limits on the Delegate that the offsite constructs have tried to place on them for years without success through ingame mechanics.
Forensatha
TNPer
The membership requirements of the previous:
The membership requirements for the current:
I fail to see how the requirements for this version are less strict.
Also, I'll note that Tresville is not actually qualified to sit on the Security Counsel. Influence ranking of Minnow, which under this is instant disqualification.
As for the influence system: I've read over it. And I've read over this. Nothing prevents an invading nation from coming in and purposefully sacrificing their influence, once in power, to be rid of those who could get them out of power. Nor anything in it that prevents them from responding by trading off with another. Yes, they'll have to work a long time to gain it back, but their influence ranking realistically isn't going to stop them from being ejected from the region if the regional government retakes power anyway. Once the invasion's done and the necessary nations ejected, they really don't have that much use for it anymore.
At current, I still remain unsatisfied that this will actually be realistically effective.
The membership requirements for the current:
I fail to see how the requirements for this version are less strict.
Also, I'll note that Tresville is not actually qualified to sit on the Security Counsel. Influence ranking of Minnow, which under this is instant disqualification.
As for the influence system: I've read over it. And I've read over this. Nothing prevents an invading nation from coming in and purposefully sacrificing their influence, once in power, to be rid of those who could get them out of power. Nor anything in it that prevents them from responding by trading off with another. Yes, they'll have to work a long time to gain it back, but their influence ranking realistically isn't going to stop them from being ejected from the region if the regional government retakes power anyway. Once the invasion's done and the necessary nations ejected, they really don't have that much use for it anymore.
At current, I still remain unsatisfied that this will actually be realistically effective.
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
What you seem to lack, and unfortunately completely failed to read in my previous post, is that what you suggest can not happen.
Logistically and technically, no invading nation can ever gain enough Influence to eject and ban the entire Security Council.
First, in order to be of sufficient Influence to remove even one member of the Security Council you would need to have an Influence level sufficiently high enough to actually be in the Council to begin with and no "invader" will be able to gain that much Influence without being seen on the daily endorsement scans.
Second, even if an invader overtook the Delegate they would not be able to use the Regional Controls to remove, as I have now stated multiple times, more than possibly one member of the Council due to not having sufficient Influence.
I am not sure what your dilemma is but you seem to be manufacturing issues that can not possibly exist and then continually ignoring the explanation refuting them. No invader can take the Delegacy of The North Pacific and hold it for a significant amount of time and also remove all members of the region with high levels of Influence and/or endorsements. It is not mechanically possible.
Logistically and technically, no invading nation can ever gain enough Influence to eject and ban the entire Security Council.
First, in order to be of sufficient Influence to remove even one member of the Security Council you would need to have an Influence level sufficiently high enough to actually be in the Council to begin with and no "invader" will be able to gain that much Influence without being seen on the daily endorsement scans.
Second, even if an invader overtook the Delegate they would not be able to use the Regional Controls to remove, as I have now stated multiple times, more than possibly one member of the Council due to not having sufficient Influence.
I am not sure what your dilemma is but you seem to be manufacturing issues that can not possibly exist and then continually ignoring the explanation refuting them. No invader can take the Delegacy of The North Pacific and hold it for a significant amount of time and also remove all members of the region with high levels of Influence and/or endorsements. It is not mechanically possible.
Outer Kharkistania
TNPer
See, most feeder despots aren't that clever.
That's why there are so many ex-despots going around working as consultants these days.
That's why there are so many ex-despots going around working as consultants these days.
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
No, it is just that such an act is an exercise in failure. Matthuis attempted that very method.
That method will prolong the Delegacy but not unto perpetuity, there are limits to how many Minnows a Delegate can eject.
And I am a retired despot, not a conquered one.
Al Homa
TNPer
It creates a infinite level of dedication to remain in the delegacy whilst practicing such a policy and if not measured correctly then even that would be insufficient for retaining the delegacy.
As shown in previous conflicts however (I am referring to my experience of the Crimson conflict), even the high influence members were unable to prevent a rogue sitting easily on the delegacy. He was unable to remove them, yes, but had sufficient power to remove any new nations endorsing them.
A better approach to preventing despotism would be to encourage all RA members to hold an endorsement level of around 80 so that they all have considerable influence to really harm the influence levels of any tyrant who attempted to remove them.
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
Yes, that would be a good idea although then you have a Delegate with insufficient Influence to handle any real external threat (invasion) because its level would be diluted to a point of ineffectiveness.
mr_sniffles
TNPer
Looks good to me.
Tresville
TNPer
Kor, try to boot 100+ minnow wa's right before update....I don't think it will be too effective and it can also be a ploy.
I really do not understand why people can't grasp the influence concept. We have to use it, the security council must have a certain level of influence to have power.
However I am concerned about one thing. We must keep in mind that not everyone with influence can be trusted. I believe we need a safeguard against this. Perhaps if someone with influence has had to be warned about tarting....they cannot apply to the Security Council for 6 months. We can add a posting requirement in the forum as well.
Trust is just as important as the influence level in security matters. Just an idea.
I really do not understand why people can't grasp the influence concept. We have to use it, the security council must have a certain level of influence to have power.
However I am concerned about one thing. We must keep in mind that not everyone with influence can be trusted. I believe we need a safeguard against this. Perhaps if someone with influence has had to be warned about tarting....they cannot apply to the Security Council for 6 months. We can add a posting requirement in the forum as well.
Trust is just as important as the influence level in security matters. Just an idea.
Outer Kharkistania
TNPer
This just sounds like its being built around several members who are already high influence while excluding other current high influence nations and any future ones.
I don't like Government Bodies specifically tailored with several specific people in mind.
I don't like Government Bodies specifically tailored with several specific people in mind.
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
How does it exclude future members?
Outer Kharkistania
TNPer
If Cisco's suggestion gets adopted, all one would have to do to keep someone off the Council is issue them some kind of warning, and with the warning threshold floating and unclear, this could be used as a tool to keep people off the Council. In fact, someone has told me in confidence that Elu's original legislation was in fact drafted to give more of a legal basis for dealing with endotarters without having to deal with instituting endocaps.
Tresville
TNPer
Yes it was....we discussed using the SC as a floating cap. If they surpass a SC member they get warned...of course only if the SC member is staying above the percentage specified.
This was "our" proposal by the way...Elu just put together what we had already discussed. One of many...and it was more than 2 people in on the discussion.
This was "our" proposal by the way...Elu just put together what we had already discussed. One of many...and it was more than 2 people in on the discussion.
Tresville
TNPer
You do know we have members with influence that rarely participate in the forum right...but still show up at least. Ivan makes a good point as well.
I believe my Cabinet is very diverse. So I don't understand your concern. We are looking for trusted members that are supporting the government and have High Influence in order to prevent rogues and invasions. They would obviously have to have tenure and influence. We also did not create the influence system...we simply play with it.
Outer Kharkistania
TNPer
I mentioned nothing about the Cabinet.
R
Romanoffia (Guest)
Guest
OK, I see what you are driving at. There was a similar idea that a number of us floated a while back that was called "The Guardians" - a group of nations set up with enough endorsements to pull in the event of a rogue Delegate.
The concept was that a group of nations with enough influence (so they would be extremely costly for a rogue delegate to eject) and enough endorsements extended to the Delegate that ejecting them en mass would be well neigh impossible and if they pulled their endorsements they Delegate would fall no matter what.
I misread your proposal - The idea of a core of unejectable nations as a security measure is actually a very good idea, especially in the continuity of government and preservation of Constitution.
Kor
TNPer
Matthuis actually could have held the Delegate spot much longer. He only failed because his allies grew weary. It had nothing to do with TNP. In fact TNP handled the matter very badly. Trust me I know. I had an inside look at it all. And you don't have to boot 100+ minnow at update. You can just banject throughout the day. And actually kicking 100+ would be extremely easy as long as you have access to an endotoaster. 
R
Romanoffia (Guest)
Guest
True, but nevertheless, Matty did fall for a number of reasons.
The key to winning anything is have a more dedicated sense of duty and, most important, an unbending will to accomplish a task no matter how long it takes and no matter the cost.
There's a simple maxim to follow whenever fighting from an inferior strategic position:
When fighting overwhelming numerical superiority and resources, all you have to do is to survive; those in a superior position must defeat you in order to win. If they cannot defeat you, you will eventually win by simple perseverance and pure will.
The key to winning anything is have a more dedicated sense of duty and, most important, an unbending will to accomplish a task no matter how long it takes and no matter the cost.
There's a simple maxim to follow whenever fighting from an inferior strategic position:
When fighting overwhelming numerical superiority and resources, all you have to do is to survive; those in a superior position must defeat you in order to win. If they cannot defeat you, you will eventually win by simple perseverance and pure will.
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
Kicking 3000 non-WA Minnow nations is extremely easy but once you start ejecting and banning WA nations, even Minnow nations, each one chips a small (it says insignificant but that insignificant times several dozen or a 100 is not so) measure from your overall Influence. Eventually you will get to the point where you will go to the Regional Controls and attempt to eject a nation and it will tell you that you do not have enough Influence to eject and ban or eject that nation. Sometimes that happens when you are still listed as a Vassal or higher on your nation display because the updating of that doesn't always match immediately.Matthuis actually could have held the Delegate spot much longer. He only failed because his allies grew weary. It had nothing to do with TNP. In fact TNP handled the matter very badly. Trust me I know. I had an inside look at it all. And you don't have to boot 100+ minnow at update. You can just banject throughout the day. And actually kicking 100+ would be extremely easy as long as you have access to an endotoaster.
COnsidering they have to be approved by the rest of the current COuncil, and that the Regional Assembly can remove them, or force them to be approved, I think that this situation is already sufficiently guarded against. That sounds like it would just create a layer of really awkward and unwieldy and unnecessary red tape, since then you'd have to define what constitutes an "official" warning, probably some sort of process in order to prevent that being abused ("warning" people needlessly just to prevent them from applying), and then probably have to formalize and define a few more things to make the process make legal sense.
Grosseschnauzer
TNPer
GM, you asked what I thought about about your latest draft. I need to go back and compare it to the proposal that Elu posted. There are two things I want to check: (1) whether SC still takes over the role the CLO currently plays; (2) whether the endo ranges remain flexible in numbers and retain that flexibility to be updated more frequently rather than one a fixed schedule. There may be something I'm not thinking of at the moment. (I've had various distractions today, and tomorrow might be a better day for me to have time to go over this.)
And Roman, I think it's fair to say that the SC proposal is a partial variant of the Guardian concept.
And Roman, I think it's fair to say that the SC proposal is a partial variant of the Guardian concept.
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
I'm going to be making a lengthy comment here soon, there is much to discuss.
In this particular regard I agree with Heft that there are already sufficient safeguards on Council members, as long as the people involved do their part. I think that being Warned legitimately would be a big minus in a vote to join the Council.
Al Homa
TNPer
Surely a high level of endorsement and a requirement to be recognised as a member of the North Pacific for over a year will largely ensure a considerable influence level whilst not punishing people if they were to leave the region for NPA purposes.
If we also made it necessary for the RA to accept members into the Security Council then we can prevent any unrecognised individuals from having a legal basis for SC membership that we cannot revoke until they break the law and we can prove it.
That seems like the best solution to me. I'll write a draft to include that soon and then people can scrutinise it.
If we also made it necessary for the RA to accept members into the Security Council then we can prevent any unrecognised individuals from having a legal basis for SC membership that we cannot revoke until they break the law and we can prove it.
That seems like the best solution to me. I'll write a draft to include that soon and then people can scrutinise it.
I am satisfied with the proposal as revised. I think it shall provide a meaningful basis upon which to utilize a significant regional defense resource. In plainer terms, when the next despot comes around, I'm hoping it will save us from having to scramble for back-up.
Gracius Maximus
Tyrant (Ret.)
I have updated the Act in the OP to reflect the last revision.