Security Council Requirements Update Bill

[Eluvatar]

Section 5.1 of the Codified Law of The North Pacific will be amended to the following:

Section 5.1: Council Requirements
4. The influence requirement for members of the Council consists of an influence score (Soft Power Disbursement Rating) within The North Pacific greater than or equal to 330, or an influence rank within The North Pacific greater than or equal to Apprentice, whichever is lower.
5. The minimum endorsement count for members of the Council is defined as 300 endorsements, or 50 per cent of the serving Delegate's endorsement count, whichever is lower.
6. The Vice Delegate must maintain an endorsement level of at least 75 per cent of the Delegates endorsement count.
7. Where the computation results in fractions, the count shall be rounded down.
8. The serving Delegate is exempt from endorsement requirements.

Spoiler: Annotated

Section 5.1: Council Requirements
4. The influence requirement for members of the Council consists of an influence score (Soft Power Disbursement Rating) within The North Pacific greater than or equal to 270 330, though when a nation's influence score within The North Pacific is unknown as the displayed score may include significant influence within other regions, or an influence rank within The North Pacific greater than or equal to Apprentice, whichever is lower Vassal may be substituted.
5. The minimum endorsement count for members of the Council is defined as 200 300 endorsements, or 50 per cent of the serving Delegate's endorsement count, whichever is lower.
6. The Vice Delegate must maintain an endorsement level of at least 75 per cent of the Delegates endorsement count.
7. Where the computation results in fractions, the count shall be rounded down.
8. The serving Delegate is exempt from endorsement requirements.

Why now? Because we have new influence ranks. If you look at the SC Alerts system you will also see that all SC members are of at least the Apprentice rank and have over 300 endorsements. Indeed, all Apprentices have over 318 SPDR, so the Apprentice rank clearly shows possession of over 318 SPDR of TNP influence, proving that one has more than the 302 TNP SPDR required.

Why the simultaneous change from 200 endorsements, 270 SPDR to 300 endorsements, 330 SPDR? Because our Security Council is quite large and I feel the minimum requirements are too generous to us. While Apprentice is not sufficient to prove possession of 330 SPDR, it nearly is at this time, and Apprentice is a threshold that will naturally shift if the region size changes just as the alternative 50% of the Delegate's endorsements requirement would.

For reference, the calculated SPDR requirements matching endorsement requirements look like this:

Endorsements[c]Influence Score[c]Influence Rank definitely higher than that score[c]500[c]427[c]Vassal[c]450[c]405[c]Vassal[c]400[c]382[c]Vassal[c]350[c]357[c]Vassal[c]300[c]330[c]Vassal[c]250[c]302[c]Apprentice[c]200[c]270[c]Apprentice

Spoiler: Version 1

Section 5.1 of the Codified Law of The North Pacific will be amended to the following:

Section 5.1: Council Requirements
4. The influence requirement for members of the Council consists of an influence score (Soft Power Disbursement Rating) within The North Pacific greater than or equal to 302, though when a nation's influence score within The North Pacific is unknown as the displayed score may include significant influence within other regions, an influence rank within The North Pacific greater than or equal to Apprentice may be substituted.
5. The minimum endorsement count for members of the Council is defined as 250 endorsements, or 50 per cent of the serving Delegate's endorsement count, whichever is lower.
6. The Vice Delegate must maintain an endorsement level of at least 75 per cent of the Delegates endorsement count.
7. Where the computation results in fractions, the count shall be rounded down.
8. The serving Delegate is exempt from endorsement requirements.

Spoiler: Annotated

Section 5.1: Council Requirements
4. The influence requirement for members of the Council consists of an influence score (Soft Power Disbursement Rating) within The North Pacific greater than or equal to 270 302, though when a nation's influence score within The North Pacific is unknown as the displayed score may include significant influence within other regions, an influence rank within The North Pacific greater than or equal to Vassal Apprentice may be substituted.
5. The minimum endorsement count for members of the Council is defined as 200 250 endorsements, or 50 per cent of the serving Delegate's endorsement count, whichever is lower.
6. The Vice Delegate must maintain an endorsement level of at least 75 per cent of the Delegates endorsement count.
7. Where the computation results in fractions, the count shall be rounded down.
8. The serving Delegate is exempt from endorsement requirements.

Spoiler: Version 2

Section 5.1 of the Codified Law of The North Pacific will be amended to the following:

Section 5.1: Council Requirements
4. The influence requirement for members of the Council consists of an influence score (Soft Power Disbursement Rating) within The North Pacific greater than or equal to 330, or an influence rank within The North Pacific greater than or equal to Apprentice.
5. The minimum endorsement count for members of the Council is defined as 300 endorsements, or 50 per cent of the serving Delegate's endorsement count, whichever is lower.
6. The Vice Delegate must maintain an endorsement level of at least 75 per cent of the Delegates endorsement count.
7. Where the computation results in fractions, the count shall be rounded down.
8. The serving Delegate is exempt from endorsement requirements.

Spoiler: Annotated

Section 5.1: Council Requirements
4. The influence requirement for members of the Council consists of an influence score (Soft Power Disbursement Rating) within The North Pacific greater than or equal to 270 330, though when a nation's influence score within The North Pacific is unknown as the displayed score may include significant influence within other regions, or an influence rank within The North Pacific greater than or equal to Apprentice Vassal may be substituted.
5. The minimum endorsement count for members of the Council is defined as 200 300 endorsements, or 50 per cent of the serving Delegate's endorsement count, whichever is lower.
6. The Vice Delegate must maintain an endorsement level of at least 75 per cent of the Delegates endorsement count.
7. Where the computation results in fractions, the count shall be rounded down.
8. The serving Delegate is exempt from endorsement requirements.

 

[SillyString]

I am in favor of this change.

 

[Guy]

This makes sense to me for the reasons articulated above. Both the new ranks and SPDR are logical, given the influence distribution in the region. And good on Eluvatar for so quickly drawing the RA's attention to the new ranks and drafting this proposal.

On the issue of "the SC is too big", if that's actually an issue, it'd a bit difficult to resolve I think. As far as I can tell, the ways a nation can leave the SC is voluntarily or being kicked out. While there is also the possibility of not making the SPDR/endo hurdles, any nation which even semi-actively trades endorsements should be able to maintain its influence and endorsements above that level. Unless we stop admitting new people, which is also unlikely (good people prop up every now and then), I think its size will probably continue increasing.

 

[SillyString]

I'll put any credence in the idea that the SC is too large when the people saying it start voting against candidates that they actually want to be on it. Until then, it's a convenient catchphrase for "It's too full of people I don't want there".

 

[Vazos]

I hadn't noticed the new ranks. This is a good change.

 

[Guy]

I'll put any credence in the idea that the SC is too large when the people saying it start voting against candidates that they actually want to be on it. Until then, it's a convenient catchphrase for "It's too full of people I don't want there".

As someone whom I imagine has considerable experience with the workings of the SC, is there any way in which they are hindered (e.g. lack of efficiency?) via an increased size?

 

[Eluvatar]

After consulting with Democratic Donkeys, who agreed with my preference for a higher requirement, and with Sillystring, I have changed the bill to require 300 endorsements and the corresponding 330 SPDR. For simplicity's sake, I'm also proposing allowing the substitution of an Apprentice rank in general, even though a nation with slightly less than 330 SPDR could attain that rank. There are 23 Apprentices in The North Pacific, of whom 11 are SC members. I am not concerned that Apprentice would be too low an influence requirement. Should Apprentices become rarer, however, we will have the 330 SPDR alternative requirement and not face a problematic situation of having our requirements be too strict.

 

[SillyString]

I'll put any credence in the idea that the SC is too large when the people saying it start voting against candidates that they actually want to be on it. Until then, it's a convenient catchphrase for "It's too full of people I don't want there".

As someone whom I imagine has considerable experience with the workings of the SC, is there any way in which they are hindered (e.g. lack of efficiency?) via an increased size?

Previously, it could be an issue for quorum when many SC members were inactive (whereas with a smaller council, there are fewer people you need to nag to vote).

Currently, I think the hindrance would be the desire for broad input. With a large council, more time needs to be allowed in most cases for all members to consider the topic. This may be good or bad, depending on your opinion, and it's hard to extrapolate what will happen in an emergency. I think the SC would react decisively more quickly than in non emergency situations.

It arguably increases the risks for leaks and security problems, but I don't consider the extent of that a significant concern.

 

[Eluvatar]

I'll put any credence in the idea that the SC is too large when the people saying it start voting against candidates that they actually want to be on it. Until then, it's a convenient catchphrase for "It's too full of people I don't want there".

I would like to see Piscivore join the Security Council.

On IRC SillyString suggests adding "whichever is lower" to the end of the new version of clause 4:

4. The influence requirement for members of the Council consists of an influence score (Soft Power Disbursement Rating) within The North Pacific greater than or equal to 330, or an influence rank within The North Pacific greater than or equal to Apprentice, whichever is lower.

I'm inclined to agree. Thoughts?

 

[mcmasterdonia]

Piscivore is not the only instance where this matter came up, of course. Apparently all of the last few applicants should not have been there without the divine approval of a Shnauzer.

I support this change.

 

[Flemingovia]

the changes to requirements look sensible to me, insofar as they go.

Before he departed, grosse was talking about introducing some other criteria for SC acceptance. Did this get anywhere in SC debate, and if so would this be an opportune moment to bundle it in?

 

[Syrixia]

Full support. If the influence levels are changed so too must our Security Council requirements law be updated.

 

[Flemingovia]

Does it seem odd to anyone else that the 30th rank in the new system is "hegemony"? All the other levels have titles or ranks, this one has a system of government.

For consistency I think the 30th rank should have been "hegemon".

 

[Syrixia]

Agreed, but then again we always say NS stats don't matter in RP; so I knew the NS admins would get something wrong or inaccurate with the influence titles.

 

[plembobria]

Support!

 

[falapatorius]

Given the new influence ranks, an edit of the language makes sense. However, raising the benchmarks for admission won't really address the size and makeup of the SC. It'll just take a bit longer to reach the endo and SPDR requirement.

Apparently all of the last few applicants should not have been there without the divine approval of a Shnauzer.

Classy. It's Schnauzer btw.

 

[Eluvatar]

The current required levels were written before the WADP.

Grosseschnauzer would have liked to bring back a written requirement that applicants be trustworthy, establishing that that is the criterion the Security Council should use. I'm not opposed to this, but I'm aware such changes would be more controversial than the changes I'm contemplating in this bill, and I want these changes to be enacted swiftly.

Edited the bill in line with Sillystring's suggestion.

 

[Romanoffia]

Looks sensible to me.

 

[Cormac]

I think this change makes sense.

 

[quak1234]

Though this change may not be as hardcore as some of us might like, I still think it's a good idea.

 

[Eluvatar]

I move for a vote.

 

[Zyvetskistaahn]

The Bill is now in formal debate. Formal debate will conclude in five days, at which time a vote shall be scheduled.

 

[Tomb]

I think this would be an excellent amendment. It improves the requirements to join the S.C. at a time where many, myself included, believe that the S.C. is becoming too large. Thus, this has my fully support.

~ Tomb

 

[Zyvetskistaahn]

Formal debate is now concluded. A vote on the Bill is scheduled to begin in two days.