Message to the RA Floor

HEM

HEM

TNPer
My fellows, I stand before you today to address a situation, to address a need, and to address our future.

I do not stand here as a veteran of TNP, I do not know all her laws, nor her customs nor here past history. I will not stand here as an arrogant man who speaks of a fallen republic, or attempts to cast himself as a light at the peak of a dark tower. I want to speak as a citizen of the region, and a proud one at that.

Friends, we are a reactionary region. We never seem to be leading the charge. It takes coups and wars to get us into fighting shape, and even then we seem to wither at the slightest breeze. Again, I do not pretend to be an expert. But I have seen TNP over this past year, I love this region and its members. TNP is without a doubt my favorite feeder I have ever participated in, and it is why I came back.

But, we can't do this anymore. Today we have to decide if we are going to live or if we will die. There is no middle ground, there is no procrastination. There is only choice.

For some of you veterans here, I will come across slightly egotistic. How dare I stand here and make these demands? One who has been back for only a handful of weeks and months.

I feel for too long we have been floundering, I have seen it first hand after the Matthuis and Westwind revolutions, and then in the background ever since. We have potential here! We have players! It is just lack of motivation.

So, I stand here and I will do something rather controversial. I am going to issue an ultimatum that I know I have no right to make.

Any government official appointed by the Delegate who is inactive, who is semi-active, or in other words does not provide a reason for not being fully devoted to their position I will immediately seek to remove using the powers given to us in the RA by Article II, Section III, subsection III

4 to 6 days is all we should allow for our officials to be gone without reason. Nor will I shrink from using our powers to remove the Delegate if he becomes inactive? Do you feel I am threatening you? Good you catch on pretty fast.

So...You have my thoughts. If you don't agree please say so, please attack me, please do SOMETHING!
 
I already beat you to the whole purge the inactive thing, at least regarding the NPA, though I may have to do it again if certain members are unwilling to get active.
 
It's a great idea in theory. But, other than the obvious reasons someone is gone for a few days (family, illness, vacation, etc.), occasionally people get busy for a week or two. It has happened to me and many others in the past.

So you remove these people. Then what? It takes a week, give or take, to appoint another official, probably less active and less qualified than the first. So we repeat the cycle.

... you asked me to attack you :eyeroll:
 
Having no official is better then an inactive one. At least then nobody is getting a title for doing nothing.
 
Noble intentions, but I'd warn against bumping off government members for inactivity of a couple of days on the basic premise that, realistically, we're running out of any other appropriate active members to replace them.

Might I suggest some sort of line of succession in the case of delegate inactivity? An inactive cabinet minister or justice we can live with, an inactive delegate is a serious matter of regional security.
 
HEM:
Having no official is better then an inactive one. At least then nobody is getting a title for doing nothing.
Click to expand...
AHEM!
Art 1.3 of the Constitution:
10. If any elected official should fail to check into their account for two weeks without prior notice, the dual consent of either the Speaker, the Delegate, or the Chief Justice will commence the special election of a replacement. This replacement will fulfill the remainder of the term.
Click to expand...

I authoured it myself.
 
HEM:
2 weeks is far too long IMHO
Click to expand...
We want it long enough so that one can go on vacation or deal with RL concerns without snatching away truly good politicians who just need a break once and while. If we truly feel three or four days is better then we need to ask ourselves whether or not the same rule should apply to us.

We all take breaks from time to time, unscheduled but not unwarranted breaks. It's only when it takes a grieviously long time in which it should be a concern. That's my reasoning for two weeks.

Perhaps a week?
 
The two week activity requirement is fairly new, and I think it would be difficult to say there has been enough experience with that to change it.

As it is, HEM you can move for recall as much as you want (it's guaranteed under the Bill of Rights, but I doubt a week of inacitivity would prevail as grounds for a recall.
 
I'm not sure if total disqualification would be the answer - but some sort of consequence is certainly needed to be set in place, to deter shorter-term inactivity (5-14 days) in the higher tiers of our government.

Perhaps if it were to be for the Speaker to officially require the Delegate to admit (after returning from 5-14 days of inactivity), in a specially designated thread, a failure to diligently attend to active duties, an official apology to the TNP government for insufficiency, and a pledge to provide more competent leadership for the remainder of the term. One address could be pre-written for this purpose.

It might sound a bit harsh, but if the reason for inactivity is somewhat pardonable (i.e. RL problems) - the Speaker would be obligated to mention this. However, an official apology would still be due, with the Delegate providing no excuse himself - but TNP would naturally be more (unofficially) understanding of the situation.

In short: Public discomfort may serve well as an effective deterrant?
 
I think that an automatic suspension of duties should occur after a week, and the subordinate of that position should take over until 2 weeks, at which time the official should be removed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top