Discussion: SC Procedure Rewrite

SillyString

SillyString

TNPer
-
-
I have worked up this draft of a rewrite to the SC Procedures. I have fixed some of the issues in the existing text, and added a variety of new language. The key points to this revision are, I believe, the following:

1) Language to cover the SC's role in VD security checks
2) An adjusted application and nomination process for new members.
3) Tweaked the process by which an Acting Chair is determined in some cases (specifically, where the Vice Delegate is temporarily away but their position is not vacant)
4) Changed the language around endorsement gatherers to reflect current (WADP-influenced) expectations
5) Updated the descriptions of the regional alert levels to be more in line with more current needs and procedures (for example, I believe that the current distinction between Orange and Red is counterproductive, in that it requires us to announce whether we think a rogue delegate will remain in power for a significant amount of time. Moving to Red, therefore, could seriousy undermine morale in the event of such a rogue delegate.)
6) Added in language specifically preventing the VD from voting in the SC unless they are a member in their own rights. I'm open to removing this if the majority are against it, but I personally think that a non-member VD should only chair discussions and handle administrative tasks, not vote regularly.

There are of course a few other more minor tweaks, most for improved clarity.

Please give it a read and let me know what you think. :)

Procedure of the Security Council​
Throughout this procedure, "Council" refers to the Security Council, "Chair" refers to the Chair of the Security Council, and "absence" and "vacancy" refer to their respective definitions in the Codified Law of The North Pacific. Additionally, "public" refers to something which is visible to all citizens of The North Pacific by default.

Article 1: Chair of the Council
a. The Vice Delegate, as Chair, is responsible for running the day-to-day business of the Council in accordance with all applicable laws and policies.
b. The Chair may designate another person in the Line of Succession to serve as Acting Chair. This member will assume the duties of the Chair immediately upon the Chair's announced unavailability.
c. If any duty of the Chair has not been performed within 48 hours, the authority to do so will extend to the Acting Chair.
d. If no Acting Chair has been designated, or if the Acting Chair is absent or unavailable, the first available person in the Line of Succession will serve as the Acting Chair as needed.
e. In the event of a vacancy or absence in the office of the Vice Delegate, the first available person in the Line of Succession will become the Acting Vice Delegate and the Acting Chair.

Article 2: Voting
a. Except as otherwise allowed in this procedure, all votes of the Council will take place within the Council subforums of the official regional forum.
b. No vote may begin while discussion is ongoing without a seconded motion to vote, or before the end of a minimum discussion period. Discussion on a topic is considered ongoing if at least two posts have been made in that thread within the last 24 hours.
c. Unless otherwise stated in this procedure, the minimum discussion period for a topic is 3 days, and the minimum voting period is 4 days.
d. Quorum for all Council votes is a majority of its members.
e. In the absence of quorum, voting may be extended at the discretion of the Chair.
f. The Chair must publicly announce the result of any Council vote which was not publicly conducted, unless explicitly permitted elsewhere in this procedure to do otherwise.

Article 3: The Nomination of a Member to the Security Council
a. The Council may nominate by majority vote any applicant who meets the minimum influence and endorsement requirements.
b. Members of the Council may pose questions to applicants to assess their trustworthiness, reliability, and other issues of fit with the Council.
c. The minimum discussion period for any applicant is two days after they have addressed the last question posed to them by a member of the Council . The minimum voting period is three days.

Article 4: Citizenship Applications
a. Members of the Council and the Vice Delegate will discuss citizenship applicants who may constitute a security risk. Such discussions may be initiated by the Vice Delegate or any concerned member of the Council.
b. By majority vote, the Council may formally deem a nation to be a security risk, and recommend appropriate action to be taken in the case that such a nation applies for citizenship. Such recommendations are not binding on the Vice Delegate.

Article 5: Endorsement Gatherers
a. In the interest of protecting the region's ability to fight a rogue delegate, the Council will encourage nations of The North Pacific to exchange endorsements with one another.
b. In the interest of protecting the delegacy from rogue elements, the Council will observe and report on nations whose endorsements reach two-thirds of the Vice Delegate's endorsement count, exceed the endorsement count of multiple Council members, or are otherwise notably high or rapidly growing; who are endorsed by a particularly unusual group of nations; or who otherwise raise suspicions or concerns.
c. In consultation with other members of the Council, these nations should be greeted in a friendly manner, informed of the nature of democratic governance in TNP, and asked whether they seek the delegacy.
d. Nations who seek the delegacy should be encouraged to join the forum and become involved with our government as a path to achieving it. Nations who do not seek the delegacy should be advised as appropriate on methods to control their endorsement count in a safe manner.
e. The Council member who contacts a highly endorsed nation must keep the Council informed of any subsequent replies, or the lack thereof. Nations who do not respond or whose responses are aggressive, dismissive, or otherwise worrying should be regarded as potential security risks to The North Pacific.

Article 6: Other Threats
a. The Council may discuss other threats to the security of The North Pacific at its discretion and may establish informal responses as appropriate.
b. To make an official report or recommendation regarding a threat, whether it be to the Vice Delegate, the Delegate, the Regional Assembly, or to any other body, the minimum discussion period is four days and the minimum voting period is four days.

Article 7: Immediate Threats
a. Council votes on immediate and pressing threats to regional security, including official reports and recommendations, may be kept private for as long as the Chair determines that public release would escalate the immediacy or danger of the threat.
b. At its discretion, the Council may hold formal discussions and voting on such matters outside of the official regional forum.
c. Once the danger has passed, the Chair is required to publicly report all private votes and their results.

Article 8: Regional Alerts
a. A Regional Alert System (RAS), to be maintained by the Council and its Chair, may be used to automatically monitor aspects of regional security, report on them publicly, and quickly inform the nations of TNP of various security developments.
b. The RAS should present a message from the Council describing aspects of regional security, including updates on Delegate and Vice Delegate changes and other concerns relating to TNP security.
c. The Chair may update the RAS message whenever they find it appropriate. The Council may set an RAS message by majority vote.
d. The RAS will display an Alert Status, to quickly inform TNP nations of the broad security landscape at any given time. Any of the following alert statuses may be used:
  • Red: Indicates a rogue delegate in the seat. During an emergency in the WA delegacy, the Chair, in consultation with the Security Council, may declare the delegate to be rogue. The Security Council may declare the delegate to be rogue at any time by majority vote.
  • Orange: Indicates a high likelihood of a rogue delegate, be it from the sitting delegate potentially going rogue, from another nation poised to seize the seat, or any other factor.
  • Yellow: Indicates a period of minor instability in the delegacy, due to standard delegacy transfers following elections or an unexpected resignation, a failure of the legal delegate to attain sufficient endorsements to safely hold the seat, or any other reason.
  • Green: Indicates a low risk of instability or a rogue delegate, but with various regional factors, including an inexperienced delegate or low activity levels, that merit increased security.
  • Blue: Indicates near-zero risk of rogue delegacy, with regional factors such as political participation and overall activity levels contributing to ongoing stability.
e. The Chair may update the alert level whenever they find it appropriate. The Council may set an alert level by majority vote.

Article 9: Access by Non-Members
a. If the Vice Delegate is a member of the Security Council, they may cast a vote on matters before the SC. Otherwise, they may only vote to break a tie.
b. The Chair may grant access to Council forums as appropriate to non-members, such as the Delegate if they are not a member already. The Chair may revoke a non-member's access rights at any time.
Click to expand...
 
Looks good. Though I may note that the alert levels seem to jump up pretty quickly from yellow - orange. Could we perhaps have another or make orange more oriented towards situations where we have unendorsement campaigns etc, but not a threat as such to the Delegacy.

Minor issue though. Otherwise this has my support.
 
How about:

Orange: Indicates major instability in the delegacy, including telegram campaigns against the legal delegate, a nation gathering sufficient endorsements to threaten the delegacy, reasonable fear of the sitting delegate going rogue, or any other similar factor.
 
Noting for the record that I've PM'd some members who have not responded to this thread yet to ask them to give it a read and provide input.
 
almost... tldr

Article 2 defines quorum, says it can be extended, but it doesn't actually say you *need* quorum. Do you?

I'm not comfortable with Article 9. If someone decided to be funny, they could legally grant the entire RA access to the private SC forum? Delegate is the only other person I think should potentially have access.
 
My suggested changes in strikeout and bold

Procedure of the Security Council
Throughout this procedure, "Council" refers to the Security Council, "Chair" refers to the Chair of the Security Council, and "absence" and "vacancy" refer to their respective definitions in the Codified Law of The North Pacific. Additionally, "public" refers to something which is visible to all citizens of The North Pacific by default.

Article 1: Chair of the Council
a. The Vice Delegate, as Chair, is responsible for running the day-to-day business of the Council in accordance with all applicable laws and policies.
b. The Chair may shall designate another the highest listed available person in the Line of Succession to serve as Acting Chair. This member will assume the duties of the Chair immediately upon the Chair's announced unavailability.
c. If any duty of the Chair has not been performed within 48 hours, the authority to do so will extend to the Acting Chair.
d. If no Acting Chair has been designated, or if the Acting Chair is absent or unavailable, the first highest listed available person in the Line of Succession will serve as the Acting Chair as needed.
e. In the event of a vacancy or absence in the office of the Vice Delegate, the first highest listed available person in the Line of Succession will become the Acting Vice Delegate and the Acting Chair.

Article 2: Voting
a. Except as otherwise allowed in this procedure, all votes of the Council will take place within the Council subforums of the official regional forum.
b. No vote may begin while discussion is ongoing without a seconded motion to vote, or before the end of a minimum discussion period. Discussion on a topic is considered ongoing if at least two posts have been made in that thread within the last 24 hours.
c. Unless otherwise stated in this procedure, the minimum discussion period for a topic is 3 days, and the minimum voting period is 4 days.
d. Quorum for all Council votes is a majority of its members.
e. In the absence of quorum,A voting period may be extended at the discretion of the Chair.
f. The Chair must publicly announce the result of any Council vote which was not publicly conducted, unless explicitly permitted elsewhere in this procedure to do otherwise.

Article 3: The Nomination of a Member to the Security Council
a. The Council may nominate by majority vote any applicant who meets the minimum influence and endorsement requirements, and who is deemed trustworthy, reliable and otherwise fit to serve on the Council.
b. Members of the Council may pose questions to applicants to assess their trustworthiness, reliability, and other issues of fitness with the Council.
c. The minimum discussion period for any applicant is two days after they have addressed the last question posed to them by a fitmember of the Council . The minimum voting period is three days.

Article 4: Citizenship Applications
a. Members of the Council and the Vice Delegate will discuss citizenship applicants who may constitute a security risk. Such discussions may be initiated by the Vice Delegate or any concerned member of the Council. The Council, being a consultative body as to such discussion shall not vote on any recommendation to the Vice Delegate as to such applicants.
b. By majority vote, the Council may formally deem a nation to be a security risk, and recommend appropriate action to be taken in the case that such a nation applies for citizenship. Such recommendations are not binding on the Vice Delegate.

Article 5: Endorsement Gatherers
a. In the interest of protecting the region's ability to fight a rogue delegate, the Council will encourage nations of The North Pacific to exchange endorsements with one another.
b. In the interest of protecting the delegacy from rogue elements, the Council will observe and report on nations whose endorsements reach two-thirds of the Vice Delegate's endorsement count, exceed the endorsement count of multiple Council members, or are otherwise notably high or rapidly growing; who are endorsed by a particularly unusual group of nations; or who otherwise raise suspicions or concerns.
c. In consultation with other members of the Council, these nations should be greeted in a friendly manner, informed of the nature of democratic governance in TNP, and asked whether they seek the delegacy.
d. Nations who seek the delegacy should be encouraged to join the forum and become involved with our government as a path to achieving it. Nations who do not seek the delegacy should be advised as appropriate on methods to control their endorsement count in a safe manner.
e. The Council member who contacts a highly endorsed nation must keep the Council informed of any subsequent replies, or the lack thereof. Nations who do not respond or whose responses are aggressive, dismissive, or otherwise worrying should be regarded as potential security risks to The North Pacific.

Article 6: Other Threats
a. The Council may discuss other threats to the security of The North Pacific at its discretion and may establish informal responses as appropriate.
b. To make an official report or recommendation regarding a threat, whether it be to the Vice Delegate, the Delegate, the Regional Assembly, or to any other body, the minimum discussion period is four days and the minimum voting period is four days.

Article 7: Immediate Threats
a. Council votes on immediate and pressing threats to regional security, including official reports and recommendations, may be kept private for as long as the Chair determines that public release would escalate the immediacy or danger of the threat.
b. At its discretion, the Council may hold formal discussions and voting on such matters outside of the official regional forum.
c. Once the danger has passed, the Chair is required to publicly report all private votes and their results.

Article 8: Regional Alerts
a. A Regional Alert System (RAS), to be maintained by the Council and its Chair, may be used to automatically monitor aspects of regional security, report on them publicly, and quickly inform the nations of TNP of various security developments.
b. The RAS should present a message from the Council describing aspects of regional security, including updates on Delegate and Vice Delegate changes and other concerns relating to TNP security.
c. The Chair may update the RAS message whenever they find it appropriate. The Council may set an RAS message by majority vote.
d. The RAS will display an Alert Status, to quickly inform TNP nations of the broad security landscape at any given time. Any of the following alert statuses may be used:

Red: Indicates a rogue delegate in the seat. During an emergency in the WA delegacy, the Chair, in consultation with the Security Council, may declare the delegate to be rogue. The Security Council may declare the delegate to be rogue at any time by majority vote.
Orange: Indicates a high likelihood of a rogue delegate, be it from the sitting delegate potentially going rogue, from another nation poised to seize the seat, or any other factor.
Yellow: Indicates a period of minor instability in the delegacy, due to standard delegacy transfers following elections or an unexpected resignation, a failure of the legal delegate to attain sufficient endorsements to safely hold the seat, or any other reason.
Green: Indicates a low risk of instability or a rogue delegate, but with various regional factors, including an inexperienced delegate or low activity levels, that merit increased security.
Blue: Indicates near-zero risk of rogue delegacy, with regional factors such as political participation and overall activity levels contributing to ongoing stability.

e. The Chair may update the alert level whenever they find it appropriate. The Council may set an alert level by majority vote. The Council’s vote as to the alert level takes precedence over any level set by the Chair.

Article 9: Access by Non-Members
a. If the Vice Delegate is a member of the Security Council, they may cast a vote on matters before the SC. Otherwise, they may only vote to break a tie.
b. The Chair may grant limited access to Council forums as appropriate to non-members, such as the Delegate if they are not a member already. The limitation shll be as to both duration and areas of the Council forums. The Chair may revoke a non-member's access rights at any time.
Click to expand...
 
To address Grosse's amendments:

I don't agree with your change to article one. Sometimes the first person won't be available, for instance Romanoffia is not currently available. We should allow some freedom to the Vice Delegate to designate someone as Acting VD, given that they must be in the L.O.S, this is unlikely to be a problem.

Plus why is it requiring that the VD designate them? When that is already the standard practice for absences, that the highest person becomes the Acting VD.

Article 2:
Why are we removing Quorum requirements?
No problem with the second change here.

Article 3:
No issues here.

Article 4:
The two sections seem to contradict each other, or at least give off two different message. Why would we want to prevent us voting if the VD thinks that is necessary?

Article 8:
ehh.. Not a big deal, but seems a little unnecessary.

Article 9
We only have one private forum and one public one, I agree with limiting it as to the time, but that seems implied in the "limited" access part to me.
I'll also say here that I disagree with Erastide, in the past when we have had some seriously bad unendorsement campaigns the Acting Vice Delegate at the time (Great Bights Mum) allowed the Minister of Defence to have temporary access to help with the coordination with the North Pacific Army. We should allow some degree of flexibility here.
 
mcmasterdonia:
To address Grosse's amendments:

I don't agree with your change to article one. Sometimes the first person won't be available, for instance Romanoffia is not currently available. We should allow some freedom to the Vice Delegate to designate someone as Acting VD, given that they must be in the L.O.S, this is unlikely to be a problem.
Click to expand...
The "highest listed available" person means just that. "Available" being the operative word. I want to avoid any implication of political favoritism in who steps in; we got enough of that with the R.A. setting the order of succession in the first place. It shouldn't be too hard to easily figure out who is the "highest listed" and "available" Council member and that leaves the implication of partisanship out of it.

Plus why is it requiring that the VD designate them? When that is already the standard practice for absences, that the highest person becomes the Acting VD.
Click to expand...

You need to direct that question to SillyString, not me. But the change I suggest is designed to avoid discretion on the question on who acts; but if it is going to be in our procedures, then we need to make sure the Council and not the Vice Delegate is in control of the procedures of the council, as opposed to the wide, unlimited discretion given to the Speaker over the R.A.

Article 2:
Why are we removing Quorum requirements?
Click to expand...
Do we really need a quorum requirement? I'm not sure that for a body of the small size of the Security Council, quorum is necessary or useful. And perhaps this is an opportunity to discuss the question.

No problem with the second change here.

Article 3:
No issues here.
Click to expand...

Article 4:
The two sections seem to contradict each other, or at least give off two different message. Why would we want to prevent us voting if the VD thinks that is necessary?
Click to expand...
The procedure in part a. is a distinct and separate process from the one in part b. Part a. is the statutory consultative process in the citizenship law; and it is clear from past issues that the S.C. is not intended to vote on something to which it is only a consultative body. The addition i suggest is designed to re-enforce current practice and avoid any future confusion from part b.
Part b. is the first attempt to codify a new practice, and its use has to be distinguished from the statutory process of consultation reflected in part a., and which has to be completed in three days; which supports the view that the consultation process was not intended to involve a vote within the S.C.

Article 8:
ehh.. Not a big deal, but seems a little unnecessary..
Click to expand...
Since the process leaves open the possibility of a conflict, it is better that the S.C. as a body clearly have the final word on it, and not the Vice Delegate.


Article 9
We only have one private forum and one public one, I agree with limiting it as to the time, but that seems implied in the "limited" access part to me.
Click to expand...

The issue of access to the private areas has come up in the past, and the reality is that we have to clearly address both what areas and for how long. Neither should be open ended.

I'll also say here that I disagree with Erastide, in the past when we have had some seriously bad unendorsement campaigns the Acting Vice Delegate at the time (Great Bights Mum) allowed the Minister of Defence to have temporary access to help with the coordination with the North Pacific Army. We should allow some degree of flexibility here..
Click to expand...
FWIW, I don't see the access provision being limited only to the Delegate, so I'm not sure what your concern is.
 
Thanks Grosse.

Re: Article 9, that last point was directed at Eras suggestion that it be limited to the Delegate only, not at your amendment. I'll go through the rest in a bit more detail soon.
 
RE: Eras' comment on Article 9: I agree with McM here, in that I think there are (or can be) useful people to give access to beside the delegate. r3n has retained his access, for example, as his knowledge of influence is vast and he is very useful with the WADP program.

Perhaps a safeguard? The VD can grant access, but the SC can remove access from anyone except SC members and the VD by (majority? 2/3?) vote. That should act as a safeguard if any VD goes off the rails.

RE: Grosse

Article 1: I don't like this change. The existing default is the first available person in the LoS. The point of this amendement is for the VD to be able to designate an SC member of their choosing during a temporary unavailability to run votes/etc. And this only applies during announced unavailabilities - if the VD is serving as Acting Delegate, or if the VD disappears and their spot is vacated, the 1st available person in the LOS takes over as acting VD as normal. However, I would be willing to add in a clause making that person the default AC in the event of an unavailability, in case the VD does not designate one. Would that work?

Article 2: I am fine with removing quorum requirements, if the rest of the SC has no objection. I'll try to poke people to come weigh in on that issue.

Article 3: I don't feel the need to add that clause. The questioning period that follows covers the specific issues of trustworthiness/etc, and the whole point of voting is to determine if we do consider them appropriate. It seems circular, to me, to require that we only vote in people who have traits that are determined by the voting.

Article 4: I can take or leave this addition. Given the amount of time available to the VD on any given applicant (3 days), I think there's a de facto prevention of voting anyway since the minimum discussion and voting period is 7 days by default. But I can add it if people feel strongly about having it.

Article 8e: Personally, I think the added sentence goes without saying. I also think it's problematic to say that the chair can't change it after a council vote without accounting for time passed - if the Chair sets it at yellow, then the council votes to set it at orange, that wording would indicate that it must stay orange indefinitely until the council votes to change it again, and then it must stay at the new level indefinitely until... etc. I'd much rather leave it how it is - if any Chair acted recklessly in setting wildly inappropriate alert levels, then the SC could encourage the RA to recall them over it, and fix the alert themselves.

Article 9: I don't think this is necessary. Like mcm said, there is no limited forum access, since there exists only a single private forum and either someone can see it, or they can't. As for time-limiting, I believe it is covered just fine by their access being revocable at any point (and if my suggestion of the SC being able to add/remove access is approved of, then they'll have power on both sides of that as well). If someone is no longer the delegate, then their access can be removed. I'd rather leave this up to the VD/SC's choice - if I want to grant Elu access as long as he's delegate, I can say that in advance and he'll lose access when he's no longer delegate. Or, if I want someone like r3n to have access indefinitely, it can just be granted and then removed if, sometime down the line, doing so makes sense.
 
SS: I will respond to your comments within a day or so. I'm trying to get caught up all over the place (in RL and here) and making progress now that my new notebook is fully set up and my older one will be going out to HP for repairs before the weekend.

McM hasn't responded to my responses to his comments, and I suspect your comments did not take my comments to McM into account, which I think addressed some of your comments. But I have a couple of important emails to get out first, and then I can focus on what you posted.
 
Sounds good. :)

You're right that I didn't look over your responses to mcm before I posted. I meant to do that but I forgot. :P
 
I like the concept in general and how it is developing.

It think applicants should be reminded that there are certain 'mechanical aspects' of the SC that transcend RP.
 
This is the updated draft, and I would like to move it to vote. :)
Procedure of the Security Council​
Throughout this procedure, "Council" refers to the Security Council, "Chair" refers to the Chair of the Security Council, and "absence" and "vacancy" refer to their respective definitions in the Codified Law of The North Pacific. Additionally, "public" refers to something which is visible to all citizens of The North Pacific by default.

Article 1: Chair of the Council
a. The Vice Delegate, as Chair, is responsible for running the day-to-day business of the Council in accordance with all applicable laws and policies.
b. The Chair may designate another person in the Line of Succession to serve as Acting Chair. This member will assume the duties of the Chair immediately upon the Chair's announced unavailability.
c. If any duty of the Chair has not been performed within 48 hours, the authority to do so will extend to the Acting Chair.
d. If no Acting Chair has been designated, or if the Acting Chair is absent or unavailable, the highest listed available person in the Line of Succession will serve as the Acting Chair as needed.
e. In the event of a vacancy or absence in the office of the Vice Delegate, the highest listed available person in the Line of Succession will become the Acting Vice Delegate and the Acting Chair.

Article 2: Voting
a. Except as otherwise allowed in this procedure, all votes of the Council will take place within the Council subforums of the official regional forum.
b. No vote may begin while discussion is ongoing without a seconded motion to vote, or before the end of a minimum discussion period. Discussion on a topic is considered ongoing if at least two posts have been made in that thread within the last 24 hours.
c. Unless otherwise stated in this procedure, the minimum discussion period for a topic is 3 days, and the minimum voting period is 4 days.
d. Voting may be extended at the discretion of the Chair.
e. The Chair must publicly announce the result of any Council vote which was not publicly conducted, unless explicitly permitted elsewhere in this procedure to do otherwise.

Article 3: The Nomination of a Member to the Security Council
a. The Council may nominate by majority vote any applicant who meets the minimum influence and endorsement requirements.
b. Members of the Council may pose questions to applicants to assess their trustworthiness, reliability, and other issues of fit with the Council.
c. The minimum discussion period for any applicant is two days after they have addressed the last question posed to them by a member of the Council . The minimum voting period is three days.

Article 4: Citizenship Applications
a. Members of the Council and the Vice Delegate will discuss citizenship applicants who may constitute a security risk. Such discussions may be initiated by the Vice Delegate or any concerned member of the Council.
b. By majority vote, the Council may formally deem a nation to be a security risk, and recommend appropriate action to be taken in the case that such a nation applies for citizenship. Such recommendations are not binding on the Vice Delegate.

Article 5: Endorsement Gatherers
a. In the interest of protecting the region's ability to fight a rogue delegate, the Council will encourage nations of The North Pacific to exchange endorsements with one another.
b. In the interest of protecting the delegacy from rogue elements, the Council will observe and report on nations whose endorsements reach two-thirds of the Vice Delegate's endorsement count, exceed the endorsement count of multiple Council members, or are otherwise notably high or rapidly growing; who are endorsed by a particularly unusual group of nations; or who otherwise raise suspicions or concerns.
c. In consultation with other members of the Council, these nations should be greeted in a friendly manner, informed of the nature of democratic governance in TNP, and asked whether they seek the delegacy.
d. Nations who seek the delegacy should be encouraged to join the forum and become involved with our government as a path to achieving it. Nations who do not seek the delegacy should be advised as appropriate on methods to control their endorsement count in a safe manner.
e. The Council member who contacts a highly endorsed nation must keep the Council informed of any subsequent replies, or the lack thereof. Nations who do not respond or whose responses are aggressive, dismissive, or otherwise worrying should be regarded as potential security risks to The North Pacific.

Article 6: Other Threats
a. The Council may discuss other threats to the security of The North Pacific at its discretion and may establish informal responses as appropriate.
b. To make an official report or recommendation regarding a threat, whether it be to the Vice Delegate, the Delegate, the Regional Assembly, or to any other body, the minimum discussion period is four days and the minimum voting period is four days.

Article 7: Immediate Threats
a. Council votes on immediate and pressing threats to regional security, including official reports and recommendations, may be kept private for as long as the Chair determines that public release would escalate the immediacy or danger of the threat.
b. At its discretion, the Council may hold formal discussions and voting on such matters outside of the official regional forum.
c. Once the danger has passed, the Chair is required to publicly report all private votes and their results.

Article 8: Regional Alerts
a. A Regional Alert System (RAS), to be maintained by the Council and its Chair, may be used to automatically monitor aspects of regional security, report on them publicly, and quickly inform the nations of TNP of various security developments.
b. The RAS should present a message from the Council describing aspects of regional security, including updates on Delegate and Vice Delegate changes and other concerns relating to TNP security.
c. The Chair may update the RAS message whenever they find it appropriate. The Council may set an RAS message by majority vote.
d. The RAS will display an Alert Status, to quickly inform TNP nations of the broad security landscape at any given time. Any of the following alert statuses may be used:
  • Red: Indicates a rogue delegate in the seat. During an emergency in the WA delegacy, the Chair, in consultation with the Security Council, may declare the delegate to be rogue. The Security Council may declare the delegate to be rogue at any time by majority vote.
  • Orange: Indicates major instability in the delegacy, including telegram campaigns against the legal delegate, a nation gathering sufficient endorsements to threaten the delegacy, reasonable fear of the sitting delegate going rogue, or any other similar factor.
  • Yellow: Indicates a period of minor instability in the delegacy, due to standard delegacy transfers following elections or an unexpected resignation, a failure of the legal delegate to attain sufficient endorsements to safely hold the seat, or any other reason.
  • Green: Indicates a low risk of instability or a rogue delegate, but with various regional factors, including an inexperienced delegate or low activity levels, that merit increased security.
  • Blue: Indicates near-zero risk of rogue delegacy, with regional factors such as political participation and overall activity levels contributing to ongoing stability.
e. The Chair may update the alert level whenever they find it appropriate. The Council may set an alert level by majority vote.

Article 9: Access by Non-Members
a. If the Vice Delegate is a member of the Security Council, they may cast a vote on matters before the SC. Otherwise, they may only vote to break a tie.
b. The Chair may grant access to Council forums as appropriate to non-members, such as the Delegate if they are not a member already. The Chair may revoke a non-member's access rights at any time, and the Council may do so by majority vote.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top