Crushing Our Enemies for Speaker

Crushing Our Enemies for Speaker​

Introduction
Fellow members of the Regional Assembly, it is my pleasure to present to you the platform of my campaign for Speaker of the Regional Assembly. Rarely does someone so new to the region as myself have an interest in serving the region in such an active manner. There will likely be questions as to my competence in regional law and RA procedure, as well as my dedication to the region. I wish to state unequivocally that I am running for Speaker to continue the great work of past Speakers, and build upon that legacy to establish a brighter future for the RA. I have no other agenda. As testament, I humbly offer you my platform:

Update the RA Membership Rolls
Currently, there are at least fourteen RA members who are not on the public membership rolls, including myself. It would appear that no members have been added or removed since late November. If you elect me to be your Speaker, I promise that on January 18th, I will update the public RA Membership Rolls. I will consult with Eluvatar to ensure that I edit the sheet properly, in a way that will not inhibit the operation of scripts in operation on that sheet. I consider this a high-priority task, because currently, there is no accurate list of RA members. There are several members on the list who have not logged into the forum for 30 days. Others have no nation of record in The North Pacific. This is a big problem requiring a swift solution, and if you elect me your Speaker, I will not let it persist a single day. Furthermore, I shall be checking the RA Membership Applications and Membership Changes threads daily, and updating the list accordingly.

Appoint a Registrar of Confidential Puppets
In order to be in the RA and vote in elections, members are required to disclose their WA nation, if they have one. Leaving aside the issue of whether this is good policy, several members of our Regional Assembly change which of their puppet nations is in the WA, sometimes quite frequently, and do not wish the public to know when this is going to happen, or which nations they will be switching their WA status to.

To accommodate these members, Law 6.2 requires that the Speaker appoint a Registrar of Confidential Puppets, whose task it is to maintain a list of potential WA nations from each member who is likely to switch in the current term. Naturally, this is a position of high trust and high importance. Currently, we have no registrar, which makes some hesitate even to vote in the elections, for fear of revealing their WA nation to the public. They can vote privately, but I will note that Law 6.2 requires that the Registrar be someone who is not involved in any military operations - no such law exists regarding election commissioners.

If you are interested in how I would select a Registrar, I welcome your questions in this thread, but in the interest of brevity, I shall move on for now.

Uphold Voting Decorum
If I am elected Speaker, I will enforce proper decorum in voting threads. By this, I mean that I will only count votes which state "Aye," "Nay," or "Abstain," in plain black text with no additions or embellishments. All caps will be permitted, but no alternative colors, sizes, etc. I understand the desire to display how enthusiastic or vehement one is in his or her voting preference, but that is exactly why I would not count such votes. Suppose, for a moment, that an RA member has not read the debate thread on a bill, and plans to abstain. As he scrolls down the page to the quick reply box, he sees this, posted by an RA member who he highly respects:

If that were posted in plain text, it may not have caught his eye, but its garishness made him notice what it said, and who posted it. Upon reflection, he decides that even though he hasn't read the debate, he trusts that member's vote, and changes his mind, voting Aye.

Obviously, such a situation is unlikely, but certainly not inconceivable. Simply put, the debate thread is for debate, and the voting thread is for voting. As Speaker, I would be forced to interpret any embellishments on one's vote as an attempt to influence one's fellow voters, much like, in RL elections in the United States, campaigning beyond the "No Electioneering" line at a polling place. As such, I would swiftly spoiler such votes and PM the member in question, notifying him that unless or until his vote is corrected, it will not be counted.

Conclusion
I thank you all for reading, and welcome your questions below.

Hail The North Pacific!

Hail the Regional Assembly!

COE, why does your signature claim you voted AYE on the motion to recall Gaspo when you actually voted Nay?

The confidential puppets issue is a huge one, and I'm glad to see a candidate that has a solution for it. I stopped participating in elections here in TNP a few months back because of the ridiculous rules regarding WA nations.

It just seems to me like a lot of what you say are just standard Speaker duties. The fact that a current speaker may not have fulfilled them doesn't mean it's better that you will. I mean, they're good positions, but perhaps a bit obvious.

Eluvatar:

COE, why does your signature claim you voted AYE on the motion to recall Gaspo when you actually voted Nay?

Click to expand...

Cause I meant to only paste the code, and replace the text and link from the line above, but actually only replaced the link. Fixed now - thank you immensely for pointing that out!

It just occurred to me that some planks in my platform may be interpreted as implicit criticism of our current Speaker, Flemingovia. For the record, I think he is a doing a fantastic job, especially considering his significant obligations as a forum administrator. For the most part, if I am elected speaker, I will be doing my best to emulate him, with regard to punctuality, thoroughness, and even-handedness.

Do you think you have either the experience or knowledge of TNP to exercise the duties of the Speaker?

Secondly, what does it say about your commitment to the region when you fly the flag of another region as your AV?

I think you've highlighted an important issue in regard to the Registrar and I commend you for that. A few questions:

1. What's your view on the Speaker's political neutrality? Will you vote anything other than Abstain on legislation and other RA matters and, if so, under what circumstances?

2. What do you believe the primary role of the Speaker should be?

3. Do you think your opponent's use of his surname, Stark, in his campaign platform is an attempt to capitalize on the enhanced popularity and better looks of his younger brother of the same surname?

And now to more serious business...

Belschaft:

Secondly, what does it say about your commitment to the region when you fly the flag of another region as your AV?

Click to expand...

I don't think this is a path we want to tread. There are many TNP citizens who have outside affiliations and commitments, yourself included, and I have consistently opposed calling their loyalty to this region into question based on other affiliations. I oppose it now as well. If COE is honest enough to display an outside affiliation in his avatar, so much the better; at least we know he doesn't feel the need to hide or downplay it. I think COE's commitment to TNP is well demonstrated by his desire for public service, particularly in a position that is not all that powerful but is nonetheless quite important.

Belschaft:

Do you think you have either the experience or knowledge of TNP to exercise the duties of the Speaker?

Secondly, what does it say about your commitment to the region when you fly the flag of another region as your AV?

Click to expand...

Experience is a tricky thing. Some experience can be good, and some experience can be bad. So I don't think that a lack of experience necessarily weakens a candidate. I don't expect anyone to ignore the fact that I'm new to the region. I only joined the forum last month, but that decision was not on a whim. I'd been reading this forum and watching the region for far longer. I would describe my knowledge of the legal code and RA procedure as "intimate." Furthermore, despite my short tenure in the RA thus far, I would be willing to bet that I have read those documents far more recently than most of my colleagues, particularly those portions relevant to the duties of the Speaker. It's a good question, and one that I take very seriously. Thank you for asking!

As to the avatar question, it hadn't occurred to me until a few hours ago, when someone else asked me the same question over IRC, that it would say anything about my commitment to The North Pacific. One of the major reasons I was attracted to this region was how welcoming it was to nations from all walks of NationStates. Up until now, my entire tenure in NationStates has been defined by the unending conflict between raiders and defenders. Here, I see both sides working together with their fellow citizens to sustain a democracy. Yes, my avatar is the flag of The Black Hawks - it has been my avatar on every NS-related forum I've joined and it has been the flag of every (public) nation I've controlled since 2005. I consider it a symbol of my NS heritage, if you will. Much like a first-generation immigrant may display a flag of their native homeland in the window of their house, I use the flag of The Black Hawks as my avatar out of respect to the region that has been my home for seven years. With that being said, let me make myself very clear: I am a citizen of The North Pacific. In my capacity as a citizen of The North Pacific, and a member of the Regional Assembly, I acknowledge no power or authority before the Constitution.

Cormac Stark:

I think you've highlighted an important issue in regard to the Registrar and I commend you for that. A few questions:

1. What's your view on the Speaker's political neutrality? Will you vote anything other than Abstain on legislation and other RA matters and, if so, under what circumstances?

2. What do you believe the primary role of the Speaker should be?

3. Do you think your opponent's use of his surname, Stark, in his campaign platform is an attempt to capitalize on the enhanced popularity and better looks of his younger brother of the same surname?

Click to expand...

Apologies for the double post. Cormac posted while I was writing my previous response.

1. If elected, I will vote "Abstain" on all legislation coming before the RA during my term. The neutrality of the Speaker is all-important, if the integrity of the office is to be preserved.

2. I believe the primary role of the Speaker is to ensure that the will of the RA becomes reality. By this, I mean that he opens and closes votes in a timely manner, makes the appropriate changes to the Legal Code when laws are passed. This is the core of the Speaker's job, and while it may seem simple and obvious, it is the essence of his role in the legislative process.

3. While I will freely admit that my opponent's younger brother is popular and good-looking, I will not speculate as to the intentions of my opponent. You'd have to ask him. EDIT: And, I can see now that you already have. I defer to him on this matter.

People always bring up 'experience' when a new person runs for a position. Though, you need to win an election to get that experience in the first place. Same with applying for credit, it's difficult to do if you don't have the credit history etc the examples go on. I've only just been in TNP for a year, and here I am as it's Delegate.

I applaud you for putting your name forward and giving it a go. It's great to see a fresh face in the field. Best of luck in the election.

I agree with you McM - I had little to no government experience anywhere before I became Speaker and I like to think I did a decent job of it. Experience isn't everything - though it can help at times, its not necessary to do a good job.

On that note I will most likely be voting for you COE.

mcmasterdonia:

People always bring up 'experience' when a new person runs for a position. Though, you need to win an election to get that experience in the first place. Same with applying for credit, it's difficult to do if you don't have the credit history etc the examples go on. I've only just been in TNP for a year, and here I am as it's Delegate.

I applaud you for putting your name forward and giving it a go. It's great to see a fresh face in the field. Best of luck in the election.

Click to expand...

Kingborough:

I agree with you McM - I had little to no government experience anywhere before I became Speaker and I like to think I did a decent job of it. Experience isn't everything - though it can help at times, its not necessary to do a good job.

On that note I will most likely be voting for you COE.

Click to expand...

Thank you both for your kind words!

what's your immediate response when someone calls you an idiot?

"What did I do?"

When should the legal code be updated after a vote in which a majority of aye/nay voters voted to adopt the proposal to amend it?

Eluvatar:

When should the legal code be updated after a vote in which a majority of aye/nay voters voted to adopt the proposal to amend it?

Click to expand...

I believe that would depend on the proposal in question. Unless it specifies an effective date, they are by default effective immediately, and the legal code should be updated as soon as is convenient.

So, once a majority vote of the RA has voted to enact a law, it can enter into legal force immediately?

My mistake - the Legal Code would be changed after one week, to allow for the Delegate to veto if he or she wishes. Thanks for the second chance on that one

Follow up: Should there be an explicit RA Rule regarding the process for recording changes to the legal code?

Absolutely. The fact that the answer to your original question was not immediately clear to a casual observer is proof of that. I said the answer is one week, because I think that the delegate shouldn't be in the position of vetoing legislation that has already become law. In reality, the Speaker is free to change it immediately if he or she so desires - there is no rule or law in place to stop them. If the delegate chose to veto, the Speaker would then need to reverse his or her change. That loophole ought to be shut.

A Few Questions:

1. What qualities do you feel are the worst traits about you?
2. What do you feel are your best qualities?
3. Regarding the small crisis over the two person Speaker debate... if you could go back in time, would you have asked other Speaker candidates to participate before posting an announcement?

1. At times I can be over-assertive, erudite, and presumptuous. What can I say? I'm a raider.

2. I'm patient, intelligent, and well-organized.

3. Definitely. I thought, and Tim agreed, that a head-to-head matchup would be the most interesting and informative format, but we didn't think about how the other candidates might feel. The debate is going forward, of course, but we have both indicated our willingness to participate in another debate with the full slate of candidates.

COE, a while ago when I ran for my first TNP position, a very experienced Speaker named Flemingovia told me that I was wrong in running for my lack of time and experience here in TNP, which was under seven weeks. My campaign went very well and I expected to win but I lost for that very reason. You have now been here in The North Pacific for less than a month. Do you think you actually have the sheer time to fully understand the Regional Assembly and take on one of the most important positions in the region?

Yes.

EDIT: If my answer here seems insufficient, it's because I've answered that question already:

Crushing Our Enemies:

Experience is a tricky thing. Some experience can be good, and some experience can be bad. So I don't think that a lack of experience necessarily weakens a candidate. I don't expect anyone to ignore the fact that I'm new to the region. I only joined the forum last month, but that decision was not on a whim. I'd been reading this forum and watching the region for far longer. I would describe my knowledge of the legal code and RA procedure as "intimate." Furthermore, despite my short tenure in the RA thus far, I would be willing to bet that I have read those documents far more recently than most of my colleagues, particularly those portions relevant to the duties of the Speaker. It's a good question, and one that I take very seriously. Thank you for asking!

Click to expand...

Furthermore, despite my short tenure in the RA thus far, I would be willing to bet that I have read those documents far more recently than most of my colleagues, particularly those portions relevant to the duties of the Speaker.

Click to expand...

That's a good answer, and one that I would have come up with when I ran had I been so brave.

Believe me, experience is bigger than you think. Just reading the documents does not guarantee you know everything about the field, nor should you rely on just the Legal Code or the Constitution to tell you what to do.

Thanks for the advice, but I didn't mean to imply that the Legal Code and the Constitution would be the only guides to my actions as Speaker. There's also common sense, the RA procedure, and the valuable advice of my friends and mentors in the region.