Bootise's Security Council Application

The Security Council has nominated Bootsie for a seat on the Security Council. The vote for his admission was unanimous, with 6 ayes.


The Chair now presents this to the Regional Assembly for discussion.

I like Bootsie, but with eight people already on the Security Council, I feel slightly inclined to vote nay. I don't think I'll be too mad, though, when Bootsie gets accepted.

I like Bootsie as well. I support this.

I would argue that the current population should not matter for two reasons. First would be that the Security Council most likely doesn't believe this to be an issue. They voted unanimously for Bootsie's application. Secondly, if Bootise is approved, he would make the Security Council a nice nine. I'm bothered by committees that have an even number of members.

If all of our Security Council members had extremely high influence and endorsements, then it might be worthwhile to look at the overall number of members on said body. However, at this point in time that is not the case. Bootsie is active, has high endorsements, and is growing in influence. In my view, I would prefer that we have a quality + active SC member like Bootsie on the council, rather than to exclude him simply because of concern about the large number of overall members (especially as some members are not very active right now).

Bootsie has my support.

Once upon a time when Bootsie was a young deputy speaker, he talked about wanting to join the Admin team, the security council and all these other things that managed to quite successfully put me off of him. A fair few of you know that I can be remarkably... difficult at times, and Bootsie managed to cause so many red flags that at one point, I was considering an unendorsement campaign just to keep him out of the range needed to apply for the Security Council (this was very early last year) given how untrustworthy I felt he was.

When he was elected as Vice Delegate in January, beating Flemingovia - someone who I had asked to run - no one was more surprised than I as prior to the period above, and that election we had a relationship of indifference, coupled with some very scathing, sneering and contemptuous comments from me to him regarding whatever he was doing at the time. Without a doubt, over the last year and a half, he has definitely seen exactly how I respond to people who fail to meet the standards of behaviour I expect, so it is pleasantly amusing to be able to say to the Assembly today that after six months of him serving as our Vice Delegate, that despite a few hiccups, I feel he has performed admirably. He has worked incredibly hard with me to increase our endorsement counts, and has been a solid supporter of the World Assembly Development Program - something key to improving and continuing to improve, our regional security - and has served as an involved, interested and hard-working member of the Executive Council - who was surprised to be included in the body prior to this term given the Vice Delegate does not have a formal role in the Executive.

In May, we ran on a joint ticket - at my suggestion - to Bootsie's surprise at my request and he is serving as my Chief of Staff, to work with the Ministers and provide support wherever they need.

Opinions can change, and after having him as my number two, I have to say that I am more than confident that he will serve us well as a member of our Security Council.

He also has my full support. I hope to have him with me should we manage to break a thousand endorsements before September 11th.

Lord Ravenclaw:

I was considering an unendorsement campaign just to keep him out of the range needed to apply for the Security Council (this was very early last year) given how untrustworthy I felt he was.

Click to expand...

That would have been illegal (although I'm not really surprised, given your penchant for doing what you want). Anyway, I'll be voting against this application.

Aye for Boots, he has been nothing but helpful and supportive. I don't believe the SC should be limited by seat numbers so I see no reason at all for Bootsie to be rejected. Aye, aye, and aye!

falapatorius:

Lord Ravenclaw:

I was considering an unendorsement campaign just to keep him out of the range needed to apply for the Security Council (this was very early last year) given how untrustworthy I felt he was.

Click to expand...

That would have been illegal (although I'm not really surprised, given your penchant for doing what you want). Anyway, I'll be voting against this application.

Click to expand...

Strangely, I'm well aware that it was illegal, which was why I didn't do it.

falapatorius:

That would have been illegal

Click to expand...

You sure about that? Unendorsement campaigns are not explicitly prohibited in our laws.

SillyString:

falapatorius:

That would have been illegal

Click to expand...

You sure about that? Unendorsement campaigns are not explicitly prohibited in our laws.

Click to expand...

I assumed he meant were I do it had Bootsie been elected as VD or confirmed as a member of the SC prior to everything since January. I suppose I should have noted that this was way before I joined the Security Council myself. <shrugs>

SillyString:

falapatorius:

That would have been illegal

Click to expand...

Unendorsement campaigns are not explicitly prohibited in our laws.

Click to expand...

I'm well aware of that (as far as listed crimes go). That doesn't preclude another approach though. Probably best if we don't veer off-topic...

But I love speculating about crimes in public areas!

Well, The SC roster is not so crowded these days and I always trusted Bootsie anyway.

I'm probably voting for this.

I support this as well!

I greatly appreciate all that Bootsie has done for us all!

I move that this proceed to a vote.

I second.

The motion and second are noted. A vote is scheduled to begin tomorrow (12.07.2016).