McMasterdonia for Delegate

[mcmasterdonia]

Hello Everyone,

I've decided that I will run for Delegate in the Special Elections. It's not exactly how I pictured it, and it seems a shame that Eluvatar's Delegacy has ended in this way. However, here we are, and the region once again faces a tough choice in who should lead The North Pacific in the months ahead.

I have been a dedicated and active member of The North Pacific since January 2012. In that time I have served as Minister for Defence, for more than 6 months. I was appointed by Blue Wolf and was primarily responsible for the refounding of the NPA, it's recruitment, training and general infrastructure work to get it to where it is today. It's a great community, that exists for the benefit of TNP as well as for the enjoyment of it's own members.

I have also served as Vice Delegate of The North Pacific, for four months, directly before Tim was elected to the position. In that time I worked to expand the security council, welcoming Romanoffia, Former English Colony, and Enif to the SC. I also countered an unendorsement campaign against Eluvatar when he vanished for a week. This campaign tried to force me into the Delegacy, deploying the NPA, coordinating with the SC and a strong TG campaign was able to prevent this from occurring.

I believe that I have shown my dedication to the North Pacific community since joining. I have not always made decisions that you would have agreed with, but I have always done what I believe is right and fair for TNP.

I believe and will support the strong, collegial community of The North Pacific. We are a strong, active, robust democracy. With that comes some drama, robust and passionate debate, strong alliances, and rivalries. Throughout all that though, we have a strong community that is dedicated to TNP, and I believe that when it comes down to it we unite together and do everything we can to achieve greatest, and everything we can to protect this community that we know and love.

As Delegate of one of the most active GCR's, I will work to include more new people and members into our community and government. We have a culture of providing people opportunities to serve and to learn, this opportunity was granted to me, and I would like to see it extended to others.

In terms of Governing (some of this taken from my last campaign):

The region needs to be given greater ability to hold it's ministers and other government offices to account. Current methods for doing things, do not allow this to occur. A key thing in this is to have a strong Delegate, who can lead, as well as listen. We need a strong Delegate who will take responsibility for policy successes and failures, and be prepared to hold his ministers to account for what they do, and what they don't do.

We need to have an active foreign policy, as the largest and most active feeder in the game. As Delegate I would greatly encourage further co-ordination between External Affairs and Defence. While we have some new embassies and some new treaties, I think that our external affairs involvement needs to be expanded upon. As Minister for Defence, I have been in regular contact with the military heads of The South Pacific and Osiris.

I think that we sometimes forget or even neglect the onsite community. While we have active forum goers, I would argue that very few of us would post on the regional message board all that often. (This has changed a bit recently with the emergence of Oh My Goodness Gracious). I would expect the government to take a vital role in the onsite community as well. I would expect ministers to make use of the Nationstates forum, using it to keep nationstates updated with the goings on of The North Pacific and helping to spread the goodwill of The North Pacific Army.

I think that one of the key area's that tnp has been lacking lately has been in the area of culture and entertainment. The Spam competition generated some activity, however I would like to see more. As Delegate I would like to lead the region in providing more opportunities for us to laugh, to have fun, and to get involved in the community. Interregional tournaments are one such idea. I would also like to see us take part in more Real life discussions, a lot of this does happen on IRC, however I would like to see it translated to the forum as well. I would like us to hold shared cultural events with other regions, opportunities for us to make more friends and to have fun along the way.

I will note that I will be taking a two week holiday to South America, and will be in Ecuador and the Amazon forest. Internet access should be alright for one of these weeks, the second certainly not. This has been one reason I have been unsure about entering this race. This absence will be with clear notice - and if The Security Council agrees, I would give access to my nation to a trusted member of this community. (Who I won't name yet - as I would still like to talk to him). I won't hold it against you if you don't vote for me based on this, I understand the concerns. I prefer to be upfront than to be elected on false pretences.

The North Pacific needs strong leadership. We need a leader, who listens, who consults, and is prepared to lead this region and to hold his Ministers and himself accountable for the decisions that they make. We need to continue to grow TNP's activity, and continue to work on our regional infrastructure to ensure that we are able to engage and retain new members of our community. We have a strong community, and I believe that we are the greatest region in Nationstates, it is time that we remembered it.

 

[Great Bights Mum]

OOC: Aren't you getting married soon?

 

[Fitzgerald]

Well you've certainly gotten my support!

 

[mcmasterdonia]

OOC: Aren't you getting married soon?

Unfortunately while out whale watching one day. She was swallowed by a humpback. The course your life is taking can change in an instant.


Thank you Bryan!

 

[Gladio]

Good Luck, You have my support

 

[Cove]

Endorsed. Good luck.

 

[Georgiana]

This is a very good speech. Of all the camapaign speeches I have seen in my NS life, this is the best. This speech is just not for a campaign but for motivation to others. I wish you luck in the elections. Oh and, you have my support.

 

[Cormac]

A few questions that I'm asking all candidates:

1) How will cabinet ministers be chosen under your Delegacy, if elected?

2) What will be your policy on WA voting, if elected?

3) What kind of missions will the NPA be doing if you are elected Delegate and what, generally speaking, is your philosophy of R/D gameplay as it relates to The North Pacific?

Thanks and best of luck.

 

[unibot]

We need a strong Delegate who will take responsibility for policy successes and failures, and be prepared to hold his ministers to account for what they do, and what they don't do.

Seems to me you're advocating for a stronger executive; Eluvatar often ran his cabinets with a primus inter pares (First Among Equals) approach, looking for consensus and sitting in the Co5 as "one of them". With the ability to hold people "accountable" (whereas before it was the public and the law to which ministers were accountable) you also in return get more power over them in all regards, this is quite clear in my own RL nation's cabinet, whose ministers by in large have zero autonomy -- they do and think as the Prime Minister wants or they're out.

I recall a quotation where an FRAer once said I made a great dictator and a terrible democratic representative, I heeded his words and become a General for life. You yourself have largely been riding on the public support of your own soldiers in a position you were appointed to by Blue Wolf, I'm wondering if to replicate the success of Eluvatar's term, we need a consensus-builder and "first among equals" delegate as opposed to a military leader in a time of divisive politics.

We need to have an active foreign policy, as the largest and most active feeder in the game. As Delegate I would greatly encourage further co-ordination between External Affairs and Defence. While we have some new embassies and some new treaties, I think that our external affairs involvement needs to be expanded upon.

It's really nice to say it needs to be expanded upon, but you can say that for just about everything while diminishing what was done in the term before you, casually. What do you really want to do with your foreign policy?

Besides The South Pacific and Osiris, those are two military treaties, there's not a lot of possibilities for defensive treaties that wouldn't open a shit-storm in the Regional Assembly with you siding with the Cat Burglar minority and a large segment of the population siding with the defender-leading side and both sides trying to antagonize each other. What do you have planned?

I would also like to see us take part in more Real life discussions, a lot of this does happen on IRC, however I would like to see it translated to the forum as well.

Why should it be translated on the forums? IRC is chosen for communication because its a -better-, more -fluid- communication format and lacks Gov.

Honestly, this platform is a lot of words to say, "More Treaties", "More Spam and Fun" and "Give me more power to bully ministers into discipline", plus "look at my white-washed record as Minister of Defense!". Leaks that you've been trying to cover up have revealed a somewhat different picture of the NPA from the inside than you'd have us believe exists, but I guess I'm treasonous for supporting the right of the anonymous soldier for reporting the incident to the Vice Delegate.

I believe that when it comes down to it we unite together and do everything we can to achieve greatest, and everything we can to protect this community that we know and love.

As Delegate of one of the most active GCR's, I will work to include more new people and members into our community and government.

I'd respect this if I didn't know that you don't care about actually making new players in our community feel comfortable. You care about giving privileges to your soldiers so they'll vote for you and sure, throw in a bone for the older members of TNP who have long been WA residents in TNP.

What was that you said about protecting Non-WA members of TNP from unnecessary disclosure of information that could otherwise be used to make their experience more uncomfortable through general smear-campaigns on the basis of their multi-voter status and why, although people have right to say these dirty campaigns, the government shouldn't be going out of its way to collect this information for others to use as dirt against minorities?

"Disclosure as an issue for campaign fodder would be up to the individual voters to decide if its an issue. There is no reason that people could not go and research what region individual political opponents vote in and use that to their advantage now, should they wish to. There will always be people who are more 'regionalist', if that's how they want to argue their campaigns I don't think there is much anyone could do to stop it. Limiting that could also be a restriction on freedom of speech. So I consider that argument to be moot."

Oh right, you said the opposite. Regionalists have the right to say your vote means nothing because you're a citizen elsewhere and the government should collect this information so its easier for them to say it. RARH RARH. Hail freedom. Don't tell me you stand for freedom and inclusion when you want a government that actively collects information on players so that others can alienate them using this unnecessarily publicized data. You can spin the situation all you like to try to show a better side to minority alienation, but you'll still be a merry-go-round to me.

 

[unibot]

What I'm interested in is why Mcmasterdonia has left out military policy... I see culture policy, foreign policy and executive policy... but where's military policy. He's the current Minister of Defense, surely he has something to say on what the military would be doing under him.

Military policy is by far the most divisive topic in anyone's platform, it often splits the electorate into quarters; even "moderate compromise" platforms split the electorate into only small groups that favor extreme centrism. Yet Mcmasterdonia is getting, by in large, a free ride by not discussing it at all.

 

[mcmasterdonia]

A few questions that I'm asking all candidates:

1) How will cabinet ministers be chosen under your Delegacy, if elected?

2) What will be your policy on WA voting, if elected?

3) What kind of missions will the NPA be doing if you are elected Delegate and what, generally speaking, is your philosophy of R/D gameplay as it relates to The North Pacific?

Thanks and best of luck.

Thanks for your questions!

1) I think this is a really important issue, that the council has been considering a lot lately. I like the changes that we have made recently. Where the Regional Assembly will elect the Five Ministers to serve on the council. The Delegate taking an automatic seat with voting powers. I think this will make a difference, allowing an additional person to be involved. I plan to keep this for as long as it maintains the confidence of the region.
I will say that as Delegate, I will be prepared to appoint more people to positions when we need them - I think it's unrealistic to have all positions elected. I will appoint people as necessary to assist the council in various areas.

2) My WA voting policy will remain the same as Eluvatar's policy- the one we negotiated. Open to all citizens with the disclosure requirement.

3) The NPA will continue to work within the confines of the Doctrine. We will do defending missions as we have always done, working with the UDL and FRA where possible. Most of us prefer defending to raiding, as such it would be completely against the regions wishes to make the army go fully raider - or even randomly raider (which some people seem to think I will do). I will approve of raids from time to time, that we can justify on ideological grounds. Raiding has not occurred since the very early days of Eluvatar's Delegacy. I do think that it can be a difficult issue, as such we will raid Nazi or Fascist regions, if we raid.

I hope this answers you questions!

 

[Tim]

Best of Luck

 

[mcmasterdonia]

Seems to me you're advocating for a stronger executive; Eluvatar often ran his cabinets with a primus inter pares (First Among Equals) approach, looking for consensus and sitting in the Co5 as "one of them". With the ability to hold people "accountable" (whereas before it was the public and the law to which ministers were accountable) you also in return get more power over them in all regards, this is quite clear in my own RL nation's cabinet, whose ministers by in large have zero autonomy -- they do and think as the Prime Minister wants or they're out.
I recall a quotation where an FRAer once said I made a great dictator and a terrible democratic representative, I heeded his words and become a General for life. You yourself have largely been riding on the public support of your own soldiers in a position you were appointed to by Blue Wolf, I'm wondering if to replicate the success of Eluvatar's term, we need a consensus-builder and "first among equals" delegate as opposed to a military leader in a time of divisive politics.

Firstly I would say that Eluvatar was good at treating us as equals. I believe that I have proven that I also, am consensus orientated and a good negotiator. One of the area's I think that the council fell down in, was the failure of the Delegate to give a clear vision for what he expected of each Minister. Also when it came to meetings, there was little accountability in terms of decorum. When I say strong executive leadership, I do not mean sacking people who disagree with me. Through disagreement we can sometimes reach a far better alternative. What I mean is offering my Minister's clear expectations for their ministries, working on deadlines so that things are not left over due. In terms of council meetings -this means enforcing a level of decorum. It also means giving Ministers warnings, when they are inactive, or not doing their job properly and being prepared to remove them.
I don't believe I have been riding in on the support of my own soldiers - simply because I am a General. Members of the NPA are members of the voting public as well.. I have the support of some of them (not all of them) as they believe that I have done a good job. Support of the NPA alone would not have got me elected to Council or to the Vice Delegacy, it will not get me elected to the office of Delegate either. It's insulting to the integrity, and intelligence of NPAers to suggest that they blindly follow me.

It's really nice to say it needs to be expanded upon, but you can say that for just about everything while diminishing what was done in the term before you, casually. What do you really want to do with your foreign policy?

What I mean is working on expanding our active embassy list. Tim has started to remove some inactive embassies that we do not have long cultural ties with. I think this is important. I would like to see The North Pacific engage with more regions, so that we have our ambassadors in more regions around Nationstates, and that the forum community is provided with more interesting updates to read.

Besides The South Pacific and Osiris, those are two military treaties, there's not a lot of possibilities for defensive treaties that wouldn't open a shit-storm in the Regional Assembly with you siding with the Cat Burglar minority and a large segment of the population siding with the defender-leading side and both sides trying to antagonize each other. What do you have planned?

Lol. I don't agree that I side with the Cat Burglar minority. As a cosmopolitan, I would have thought you would be appreciative of the fact that people are able to be involved in many different organizations and should be treated equally in The North Pacific.
The South Pacific and Osiris are strong military partners of TNP. I think that opportunities exist for us to become more engaged with other Feeders and Sinkers, The East Pacific is seeing a resurgence in activity, and opportunities for better relations exist in Balder and Lazarus as well.

Why should it be translated on the forums? IRC is chosen for communication because its a -better-, more -fluid- communication format

I agree that IRC is a great communication tool. I don't mean that we should take away from that - it would be great to get more forum members on IRC. The simple fact is that not all (I would say maybe even most) forum users don't use IRC. Some don't like it, and some don't have time to. I think that we can include them by having some of the real life discussions on the forum as well. It could provide an interesting opportunity for debate and increase the activity on our forum.

I'd respect this if I didn't know that you don't care about actually making new players in our community feel comfortable. You care about giving privileges to your soldiers so they'll vote for you and sure, throw in a bone for the older members of TNP who have long been WA residents in TNP.

I certainly do care about providing new opportunities for new players. As I have said, I would not be in the position I am today if I was not provided that opportunity by Blue Wolf. Other players such as Eluvatar and Flemingovia have been mentors to me, and helped me to get more involved in this region. I'd like to see this extended to new players.
You seem to think the NPA is some sort of corrupt corporation - that is not the case. I'm not sure what privilege I have thrown in for NPAers, but again you insult their independence. I do not and will not have the support of every member of the NPA simply because they are NPAers. If they vote for me, it would be on my policy, and that they believe I will do a good job. I don't have some sort of psychic power that brainwashes NPAers or anyone else to vote for me Uni.

Military policy is by far the most divisive topic in anyone's platform, it often splits the electorate into quarters; even "moderate compromise" platforms split the electorate into only small groups that favor extreme centrism. Yet Mcmasterdonia is getting, by in large, a free ride by not discussing it at all.

An oversight on my part. I'm not getting a 'free ride'. People are free to ask me questions as they need to. I would point you to the answer I gave to Cormac.

Thanks for your questions and comments!

 

[mcmasterdonia]

Thanks Tim Same to you

 

[Blue Wolf II]

ITT: Unibot bitches about how McMaster would make a poor delegate for TNP from an FRA standpoint.

Also, I think McMaster might also be running, I don't know, I sort of skimmed over the first couple of posts.

 

[unibot]

Two final questions, your answers are fairly satisfactory although you skipped over responding to my point that your policy on the WA infringed on multi-citizen voters by unnecessarily feeding regionalist's information to stigmatize them with; you blatantly said that you liked this, but I would think that if there was a way to not have this information be displayed public that it would be better than to stigmatize people and make them feel uncomfortable as citizens.

So once again,

"Disclosure as an issue for campaign fodder would be up to the individual voters to decide if its an issue. There is no reason that people could not go and research what region individual political opponents vote in and use that to their advantage now, should they wish to. There will always be people who are more 'regionalist', if that's how they want to argue their campaigns I don't think there is much anyone could do to stop it. Limiting that could also be a restriction on freedom of speech. So I consider that argument to be moot."

Oh right, you said the opposite. Regionalists have the right to say your vote means nothing because you're a citizen elsewhere and the government should collect this information so its easier for them to say it. RARH RARH. Hail freedom. Don't tell me you stand for freedom and inclusion when you want a government that actively collects information on players so that others can alienate them using this unnecessarily publicized data. You can spin the situation all you like to try to show a better side to minority alienation, but you'll still be a merry-go-round to me.

Have you had a change of heart? Are you going to seek less public disclosure for private information and let people message the delegate with where else they vote? If so, why the sudden change.

If not, how do you justify unnecessarily publicizing information for others to bully certain blocks of voters with? Do you want to see this information used against these voters? And, how does this fit into your conception of an inclusive and congenial region?

I don't agree that I side with the Cat Burglar minority

This is a rather large switch of opinion, you've told me that you agree with the doctrine of the Cat Burglars and sympathize with its proponents? Your own region, Empire of Oceania preaches similar military policies I believe.

Why the shift in opinion?

 

[Blue Wolf II]

Two final questions? I counted seven.

 

[DRUK]

I also countered an unendorsement campaign against Eluvatar when he vanished for a week.

According to the quote aforementioned, you have supported a delegate who has abruptly abandoned his obligations to implement further developments within TNP. Yet, you state the following quote:

A key thing in this is to have a strong Delegate, who can lead, as well as listen.

Are you implying, since you favor a delegate who is attentive and worthy of leadership and support Eluvatar's maintenance of power, that a leader who "can lead, as well as listen" is one similar to Eluvatar?

We need to have an active foreign policy, as the largest and most active feeder in the game. As Delegate I would greatly encourage further co-ordination between External Affairs and Defence. While we have some new embassies and some new treaties, I think that our external affairs involvement needs to be expanded upon. As Minister for Defence, I have been in regular contact with the military heads of The South Pacific and Osiris.

Bolstering military relationships with other regions will likely cause other regions(outside of the military affiliations) to perceive that we are taking an active stance towards military or forceful action against other regions. Would you say establishing peace summits or conferences with those regions to ensure aid in cases of invasions and enemy covert operations? Would this not look more peaceful and accommodating in the views of other regions?

I think that one of the key area's that tnp has been lacking lately has been in the area of culture and entertainment. The Spam competition generated some activity, however I would like to see more. As Delegate I would like to lead the region in providing more opportunities for us to laugh, to have fun, and to get involved in the community. Interregional tournaments are one such idea. I would also like to see us take part in more Real life discussions, a lot of this does happen on IRC, however I would like to see it translated to the forum as well. I would like us to hold shared cultural events with other regions, opportunities for us to make more friends and to have fun along the way.

I believe more various topics in the Off-Topic sections of the forum would encourage more members to post. Examples of those topics may be: "What Songs Are You Listening To?", "Famous Quotes Thread", "Count from 1 to 100000 Thread", "Word Game Thread"(Start with a word, and the next poster posts a word that starts with the last letter of the previous word), and other more.

Interregional tournaments, as you have stated, is indeed another good idea. Tournaments, such as the Olympics, a particular sport, and/or images of cities, and other more would definitely motivate more people to post.

The North Pacific needs strong leadership. We need a leader, who listens, who consults, and is prepared to lead this region and to hold his Ministers and himself accountable for the decisions that they make.

How would you make ministers and other officials accountable for the decisions they make? Would you care to share some examples?

 

[unibot]

Two final questions? I counted seven.

Sorry, two sets of questions. Thank you Blue Wolf.

With your impeccable pedantry I'm surprised you could ever have misread Section Eleven of the Bill of Rights.

 

[Blue Wolf II]

Misread? My dear fellow, I read it with the most purposeful of intent.

Spoiler: For those of you who can't be buggered to look it up

11. No governmental authority of the region has the power to suspend or disregard the Constitution or the Legal Code. In the event of an actual emergency, the governmental authorities of the region, with the express consent of the Nations of the region or their representatives, is authorized to act in any reasonable manner that is consistent as practicable with the pertinent provisions of the Constitution.

 

[unibot]

How would you make ministers and other officials accountable for the decisions they make? Would you care to share some examples?

His only apparent example is decorum and inactivity, but that power of directing the ministers to him adds a lot more power than just playing nanny -- as it is, the decorum and inactivity police is supposed to be the legislature not the grand executive. Largely, the legislature couldn't be bothered tossing out better ministers because they swore (even though Mcmasterdonia would have loved to get any person off a cabinet who disagrees with him on a regular basis) or inactive ministers because these same inactive ministers provided good contributions to Co5 debates. Why the disparity? Because the content of Co5 meetings rarely stays within the role of the cabinet; it often goes beyond that to decide things that the legislature should be dealing with (e.g., WA voting policy), therefore the public always has had an interest in keeping in ministers who may fail to keep up with their duties, but still represent their viewpoint well in cabinet meetings. Because in many ways the Co5 has morphed into a higher legislative house with elected representatives who are also expected to be line department heads.

If we reduce cabinet decisions down to the role of agenda-setting, policy implementation and evaluation instead of turning the cabinet in a mini-legislature, you would have a public that is more willing to sack a minister who, although representating their viewpoints, is still inactive or incompetent. You wouldn't need Mcmasterdonia to take on the role of dictator, lest we abandon democracy yet.

 

[Blue Wolf II]

How would you make ministers and other officials accountable for the decisions they make? Would you care to share some examples?

His only apparent example is decorum and inactivity, but that power of directing the ministers to him adds a lot more power than just playing nanny -- as it is, the decorum and inactivity police is supposed to be the legislature not the grand executive.

For clarification, all questions intended for McMaster can now be directed to Unibot, who will answer them on McMaster's behalf.

 

[Haor Chall]

You wouldn't need Mcmasterdonia to take on the role of dictator, lest we abandon democracy yet.

Ah yes, if the elected Delegate actually tries to do anything once in office (let alone lead their cabinet) then that means they've abandoned democracy and become an ebil dictator.... Clearly.


I know that if you can't have TNP ensnared to the UDL you want it to be an inactive mess but maybe you should try and be a less obvious about it?


I mean, your blatant hypocrisy is truely breathtaking. Truely. I've always assumed it was calculated but I'm starting to think you don't actually see it. You really are a fanatic, aren't you?

 

[mcmasterdonia]

Have you had a change of heart? Are you going to seek less public disclosure for private information and let people message the delegate with where else they vote? If so, why the sudden change.

As I said to Cormac - I stand by the decisions of the last council on WA voting policy. I will keep the disclosure requirement.

In response to the second part of your question, Eluvatar and I believed (I won't speak for Cormac) that the disclosure requirement would discourage voting in multiple regions. It is public for that reason.

According to the quote aforementioned, you have supported a delegate who has abruptly abandoned his obligations to implement further developments within TNP.

To be clear on this, it was while I was Vice Delegate during Eluvatar's first term. It was my duty to protect the region. Eluvatar had not been recalled at that stage, and there was no such motion in the regional assembly. I was not the legally elected Delegate, I had no authority to take the position - so yes I countered the telegrams to keep Eluvatar in the Delegates seat. This was done as there was no obvious threat to the Delegacy. Eluvatar returned, the government continued business as usual, and he was reelected for a second term.

Are you implying, since you favor a delegate who is attentive and worthy of leadership and support Eluvatar's maintenance of power, that a leader who "can lead, as well as listen" is one similar to Eluvatar?

Eluvatar is by his very nature an excellent listener. His first term certainly (while not perfect) I believe that he showed strong leadership and an ability to listen. I supported Eluvatar's maintenance of power in the first term, as it was my duty to do so (in game at least) and there was no recall motion in the parliament. Recently I voted against the recall, as I believed he would return. I also found it disconcerting some of the political momentum that had started well before he was recalled.

Bolstering military relationships with other regions will likely cause other regions(outside of the military affiliations) to perceive that we are taking an active stance towards military or forceful action against other regions. Would you say establishing peace summits or conferences with those regions to ensure aid in cases of invasions and enemy covert operations? Would this not look more peaceful and accommodating in the views of other regions?

Military relationships with other regions would be for security purposes. The NPA/Medgai and SPA do joint missions together on occasion, however the primary purpose of the treaties is for mutual security and defence. I would say in response to the rest of your comment, that the NPA does not really take on an offensive position in the sense that we do not actively seek out war, and I don't perceive us directly isolating another region through our treaties. I think that you are right, there are other ways for us to engage with regions. I'm not sure about a peace summit - however shared cultural events are an option. Simply because we do not share a military relationship with a region, does not mean that the relationship we have with that region is not important.

How would you make ministers and other officials accountable for the decisions they make? Would you care to share some examples?

For starters I would ensure that together the council discusses our vision and goal for the region, and the expectations of each ministry. As I have said, I think that it is important to set realistic deadlines for certain tasks. Obviously a key thing is ensuring that Ministers remain active, and that if they stop being active that I find out what the issue is. One issue with the Immigration and Internal Affairs Ministry, was that none of us were really sure what it was supposed to be doing. Offering a clear vision of the Ministry should help the Minister get back on track. If this does not occur then it is in the interests of the region that the Minister be replaced with someone who is able to do the work. As I said to Unibot, I think it's important that Ministers are held responsible for what they say in cabinet i.e. decorum is important. We can disagree, but should still at the very least show respect to one another.

Thanks for your questions!

 

[mcmasterdonia]

Sorry for the double posting - I'd just like to address this

This is a rather large switch of opinion, you've told me that you agree with the doctrine of the Cat Burglars and sympathize with its proponents? Your own region, Empire of Oceania preaches similar military policies I believe.

Why the shift in opinion?

When you said I sided with the Cat Burglar minority, I thought you meant that I backed them completely in the RA. My point was that I do not blindly support it, and I'm not even sure such a clear cut minority exists. CB and TNP holds some cross membership, as do other military organisations.
We have had this discussion on IRC before, Eluvatar (the UDL chief of intelligence) also said that he likes the CB doctrine. As a Defender, he meant in the sense that they raid, without griefing, and without destroying a community or making the game hell for others in comparison to other philosophies. I do like the CB policy, as it is possible for them to have their fun without ruining it for others. As the organisation does not pile, it makes the raid competitive for both sides and keeps things interesting. There has been no change of heart on that matter.

 

[Kiwi]

I have no questions as I understand where you stand on most of the issues that plague us!

But the best of luck all the same!

 

[Cormac]

As I said to Cormac - I stand by the decisions of the last council on WA voting policy. I will keep the disclosure requirement.

In response to the second part of your question, Eluvatar and I believed (I won't speak for Cormac) that the disclosure requirement would discourage voting in multiple regions. It is public for that reason.

First of all, thank you for answering my questions McMasterdonia.

I think it's safe to say at this point that while the Liberty Party is united in its belief that WA voting should be open to all regardless of their WA status or location, there is a significant divide between members in regard to why we believe so strongly in this. Some Liberty Party members simply oppose discrimination based on WA status or location, and I count myself among those members. Others take a much broader cosmopolitan approach and don't seem to see anything wrong with people voting in multiple regions or being active in TNP only to influence WA voting. While this latter group of people are valuable members of the Liberty Party and are entitled to their own views, their views are not necessarily representative of the party as a whole.

When I negotiated the compromise policy that is now in place with Eluvatar and McMasterdonia, I did so because that policy would have the effect of restoring every TNP citizen's right to vote on WA resolutions while also attempting to address the perceived problem of multi-region WA voting. In other words, I agreed with Eluvatar and McMasterdonia that multi-region WA voting should be discouraged because of the potential for influencing TNP's WA vote without making any other contribution to the region. The compromise policy discourages multi-region WA voting through political and social pressure while still enabling TNP citizens to vote regardless of their WA status. I supported the compromise policy when it was made and I continue to support it, although I do question the prevalence of multi-region WA voting being abused.

Best of luck to you, McMasterdonia.

 

[mcmasterdonia]

Thank you Cormac

 

[unibot]

I question why this information needs to be released publicly, it could be disclosed privately.. yet nobody in the cabinet has been able to respond to this without looking dumbstruck. You have yet to respond to my question, McMasterdonia.. saying you "agree" with Cabinet does not explain your sentiments as you said -- do you or do you not believe the government should be unnecessarily providing information to the public without care that this information could be used to publicly stigmatize other members? Because you have largely said yes to this in past as if public smear campaigns are the hallmark of an inclusive society.

"Disclosure as an issue for campaign fodder would be up to the individual voters to decide if its an issue. There is no reason that people could not go and research what region individual political opponents vote in and use that to their advantage now, should they wish to. There will always be people who are more 'regionalist', if that's how they want to argue their campaigns I don't think there is much anyone could do to stop it. Limiting that could also be a restriction on freedom of speech. So I consider that argument to be moot." - Mcmasterdonia

 

[mcmasterdonia]

I have answered this question. I believe it should be public as it will discourage voting in multiple regions. If you go to disclose where you have voted, nobody would be bothered by one or two regions. If you have voted in every feeder and sinker (as an example) that might be another story.

My comment that you have put in the small text down the bottom simply meant - disclosure or not. If people were going to launch a 'regionalist' smear campaign on the basis of where one has been voting on WA resolutions, they could research that and still do it. It's also worth noting that no such smear campaign has occurred. All citizens are allowed to vote - with a simple disclosure requirement.

I'm not sure how many times I have to answer this question. I believed, Eluvatar believed, and most of council (from memory) believed that publicly disclosing where you vote on WA resolutions would discourage people voting in multiple reasons. That is why it is public.

 

[unibot]

I have answered this question. I believe it should be public as it will discourage voting in multiple regions. If you go to disclose where you have voted, nobody would be bothered by one or two regions. If you have voted in every feeder and sinker (as an example) that might be another story.

My comment that you have put in the small text down the bottom simply meant - disclosure or not. If people were going to launch a 'regionalist' smear campaign on the basis of where one has been voting on WA resolutions, they could research that and still do it. It's also worth noting that no such smear campaign has occurred. All citizens are allowed to vote - with a simple disclosure requirement.

I'm not sure how many times I have to answer this question. I believed, Eluvatar believed, and most of council (from memory) believed that publicly disclosing where you vote on WA resolutions would discourage people voting in multiple reasons. That is why it is public.

And why does it "discourage" it? Because it's public stigmatization and intolerance. All you're doing is endorsing unnecessary public disclosure to more conveniently feed your public morality campaigns against legitimate citizens. At least people used to have to work to violate people's privacy before, now you just get the government to do it for you.

You're inconsistent; when you want to sound reasonable you justify your WA Policy on the basis of it bringing security to the region and when I bring up the point that this information could be made private.. you continually try to circumvent the question until you have to admit you're doing this ultimately to make people look bad.. that's all this is about, taking the Right to Privacy and shredding it under the pretense of security but for the purposes of public humiliation, slander and moral campaigns.

This is disgusting and you should be ashamed of yourself to even think of linking "inclusive" and yourself in the same platform. The only thing you're inclusive about is adjectives to positively describe yourself, regardless of how far removed they are from reality. To the newcomer to the region who maybe hasn't converted to being "full TNPer", these sentiments you advocate for are an attempt to constantly remind them of how low they are in your perverse pecking order.

You seek decorum because you don't want to hear a minister tell you to fuck off, I seek the protection of civil rights because I don't want to hear my delegate tell us our rights and equality can fuck off. We have different priorities and I don't see them harmonizing anytime soon unless you start becoming more "inclusive" to some actually good ideas and not three recycled points to stitch a platform together and a license to stigmatize classes of our region.

Good-day to you sir!

- Unibot

 

[Blue Wolf II]

You seek decorum because you don't want to hear a minister tell you to fuck off, I seek the protection of civil rights because I don't want to hear my delegate tell us our rights and equality can fuck off.

So, to clarify, Unibot, you think its perfectly acceptable for someone on the forums to tell another to "fuck off" but nicknaming someone "The Dog" is unacceptable and deserves a word filter changing "Dog" to "God"?

 

[Great Bights Mum]

Speaking of decorum, can we please stop with the f-bomb here?

 

[punk d]

McM - I'd like to make a few comments. A little while ago, I suggested that you should run for the delegacy. I thought you showed a good ability to take a middle ground position. That's a good quality in a delegate.

However, there have been a number of people who I thoroughly enjoyed as Minister who I believed were disasters as leaders. I won't name names to protect the guilty, but I am trying to envision a McM delegacy and it seems eerily similar to an Eluvatar delegacy.

I do not want that. I believe Eluvatar was just going through the motions and didn't do anything of particular note.

My question to you is this: Would you prefer a ho-hum delegacy or a delegacy where you left an indelible imprint on TNP? Please explain your answer.

 

[mcmasterdonia]

I am trying to envision a McM delegacy and it seems eerily similar to an Eluvatar delegacy.
I do not want that. I believe Eluvatar was just going through the motions and didn't do anything of particular note. My question to you is this: Would you prefer a ho-hum delegacy or a delegacy where you left an indelible imprint on TNP? Please explain your answer.

I will start by saying that I apologize for not answering straight away, I wanted to really think about my answer before I gave it.

Firstly I will say that I do not see my potential Delegacy as being eerily similar to Eluvatar's. While we are friends, and agreed on some of the issues, this was not the case with everything. I found myself infuriated and frustrated with Elu at times, and we often had passionate disagreements. The fact was that I dealt with these privately, and with Eluvatar directly. I do very much consider myself to be an independent person, and saw issues with the past administrations that I think needed to be addressed. I'll leave Eluvatar's record and achievements as Delegate for another day and for him to address, should he return.

On the last part of your question, I would say that all Delegate's aim for an indelible imprint on the region, I would aim for the same. I want people to be able to look back on a mcmasterdonia Delegacy and regret that it is coming to an end. I would of course only work for changes within the law - I want to make a positive imprint on TNP. I would like to see The North Pacific culturally enriched, as I see it as an area that we have not done a lot of work in. This can be done a few ways, by having shared cultural events with other regions, by increasing regional infrastructure that will become part of our regional identity (such as the NPA has become) - in this matter I have considered the establishment of a University. Keeping it simple but providing a forum for debate and for further participation in the region.

In other areas I would like to see the TNP-Wire expanded so that it takes on the roll of a more global News Paper. I want the North Pacific to become more engaged with the onsite community. Establishing a forum embassy for us to share our updates, and to provide the opportunity for the TNP-Wire to be shared inter-regionally, and to assist in spreading the good work that the NPA does and will continue to do. With us taking advantage of the opportunities that exist onsite, TNP will once again be considered the shining star of Nationstates. We have been highly engaged in the World Assembly this past 4-6 months. I would like to see that continued, as the largest region we have significant influence in that. I would like to work to increase the number of WA nations (via tging non-wa's) to encourage them to join the WA to better protect us, and to increase our influence in the WA.

I want people to be able to recognize the work that we will do with the North Pacific Army and our allies. I want to make a positive impact on The North Pacific. A Ho-Hum Delegacy while not necessarily negative, does not take full advantage of the potential of a term in the office. I would want to make full use of the powers and duties I have been given, and I want to be sure that I follow through with my responsibilities and obligations. One thing that is worse than a Ho Hum Delegacy, is one where the potential existed and was clearly there, but failure to communicate and failure to come through on the promises one has made, leads to a wasted opportunity and an annoyed/divided TNP as we have seen recently.

I hope that answers your question.

 

[punk d]

Thank you for your thorough answer McM. I appreciate it and it giving me pause to reconsider my vote.

I wholeheartedly agree that dealing with disagreements amongst your subordinates should be dealt with privately. Seeing some of the fighting on the Co5 transcripts is almost embarrassing at times.

Knowing what you know about the many personalities in this region plus some of their extra-regional agendas, what is the most difficult part of being delegate in your opinion and why are you best equipped to deal with it more than the other candidates?

 

[mcmasterdonia]

Knowing what you know about the many personalities in this region plus some of their extra-regional agendas, what is the most difficult part of being delegate in your opinion and why are you best equipped to deal with it more than the other candidates?

Hmm. The most difficult part about being Delegate, that's a hard one. My experience so far has been that the hardest thing for a Delegate to handle, on a personal level as well as a political one, is when they make a decision that they genuinely believe is the right one, but the region disagrees, violently. It is especially hard, I think, when people you consider to be friends and allies of yours, find the decision you have made to be absolutely inappropriate.

It's especially difficult when the arguments get personal, instead of focusing on the politics of the issue. This was the case with Eluvatar and WA voting. TNPers are passionate debaters, and will fight for what they believe. I think the hardest thing, can be in the face of such criticism, to either maintain the course of action that you believe to be right, or two accepting that you have made a mistake and being prepared to correct it.

I think that actions speak louder than words. I believe that I have shown an ability to negotiate and to find middle ground on a variety of issues. There are times where we must let go of our pride, and do what is necessary for the region. This means a willingness to accept mistakes. It's a two way street, we expect Delegates to be perfect - they try and maintain that, it's unrealistic mistakes will happen.

I would also say it is an important for a Delegate to listen to the concerns of his people, and to show empathy towards their concerns. I think that sometimes an honest and direct conversation will be enough to convince them that you have good intentions. If not, at least then hopefully the debate can change from something less personal and to something more productive.

 

[Iro]

A serious question if you will: you're almost certainly going to win. Why bother campaigning after this?

 

[mcmasterdonia]

A serious question if you will: you're almost certainly going to win. Why bother campaigning after this?

I am responding to questions that people ask me. I will continue to do so until the election is over.

 

[unibot]

You seek decorum because you don't want to hear a minister tell you to fuck off, I seek the protection of civil rights because I don't want to hear my delegate tell us our rights and equality can fuck off.

So, to clarify, Unibot, you think its perfectly acceptable for someone on the forums to tell another to "fuck off" but nicknaming someone "The Dog" is unacceptable and deserves a word filter changing "Dog" to "God"?

Yes. Yours was bullying, mine was an insult.