Kasch:
If you're going to tell me my statements have been 'puffed up' and 'full of fluff', couldn't you at least find me an example so I can see what you mean by that?
That is how I read many of your responses. I am not trying to nitpick every thing you have said, I think we can both agree that when you were not entirely comfortable with the subject, you presented the best answer you could, whether it had a lot of substance to it or not. I'm not trying to call you out, that was the most polite way I could critique your particular style of responding to questions and comments. This is not a flattering road to go down, so I won't, I will stick to the actual questions I asked you.
Kasch:
I was completely new to the position at the beginning of May, so I had a lot to pick up on and get used to, so it is no surprise you may not have seen me come out singing and dancing.
Sure. Vice Delegate
is a huge responsibility, though, so it's not unreasonable to have high expectations for the person in the office. Reading over my question again, I can see how it may have come off as a bit harsh. Put another way, I'm curious if during the 4 months you were learning how the job worked, did these ideas come to you in response to your surroundings and experience, or have you always meant to do them and didn't get around to it? It's basically a time management question as well as an inquiry about how you craft policy. If these things were your response to the past term, what situations did you encounter that inspired you to come up with your litany of ways to bring attention to the SC in the gameside community?
Kasch:
Experience as in exposure to the position and the duties that it entails. If r3n had decided to run, I would have been toast. Everyone knows this. I don't claim to have years and years behind me in the Council, but do you really expect me to ignore the fact that I have been VD for 4 months and Siwale for no time at all? It is simply something where I believe I have the edge over him.
In May, this community elected me because they saw no other suitable candidate as r3n had withdrawn candidacy and I cannot recall if there were anyone else who had the same ideas or vision.
And as for having a legal understanding, my knowledge of the law surrounding the Council continues to grow just as my knowledge of anything in life continues to grow. I'm not going to lie to you about it.
Everyone knows you have more experience, you are the incumbent. Unless your opponent was a former Vice Delegate or member of the Security Council, your respective experiences would not be a match. I would not expect you to ignore it, but I also would not expect you to brandish it about as if it were a talisman designed to banish Siwale into obscurity. You are making the opposite case this election than you did in May. You also did not answer my question. You won, to paraphrase your own words, because there was no one else to choose. But you ran believing you were worthy of their vote, did you not? Why did you feel you deserved to win despite the possibility and (temporary) presence of more suitable candidates? Plead for me the case of the inexperienced newcomer to the office of Vice Delegate.
I wouldn't ask you to lie. There's a lot about our respective jobs that we have to figure out along the way. I simply brought that up as an example of you excusing inexperience in the same campaign where you argue experience is the winning argument. I don't actually hold it against you, nor do I think the voters should.
Kasch:
I missed the WADP releases based on things that were out of my control. I did not realize at the time that I needed to provide an email to access the WADP spreadsheets so I couldn't get them released and I was yet to create a new email specifically for the purpose of updating them.
The real differences I have noticed are exposure to the position, time in the region, our respective opinions on certain issues and our ideas and goals for the position next term.
I don't want to harp on WADP, but it is one of the distinguishing tasks the Vice Delegate performs and I think you performed it once. Instruction and support was always available and I am surprised you did not know or was prepared to do it after the first one came due to be released. Fortunately, you will know how to do it next term, but I hope you will also own up to your mistakes more forthrightly in the months ahead as well. I know this gave the SC a headache.
I know you have more experience, we already talked about that, and I don't see how time in the region really matters (I was elected Delegate after 8 months after all). Let's focus on those two differences you outlined, opinions on certain issues and ideas and goals. I know you guys differ on those, that's why I asked the question about it. You still haven't told me what those differences actually are. This isn't a tick question, you guys have argued extensively in Siwale's thread, so I know you know there are differences. What are they, in your own view? How do you describe them?
Kasch:
Being a member of the SC is different to being Vice Delegate. My judgments on Siwale towards the beginning of those discussions were in his favour because I saw the positive aspects of his character in relation to Security Council membership, not Vice Delegacy.
To put it bluntly, duh, the positions are different, though to be fair, I did not ask about your opinion of him as a potential Vice Delegate, I asked if you still believed he would make a good member of the SC. I would still like an answer to that question. If I understand you correctly, though, you are saying that you thought he had good character for a member of the SC, but that those traits do not apply to the Vice Delegate role. Frankly, this just creates more questions for me. What good qualities of his character exist that wouldn't also be good for a Vice Delegate? Do you believe the two roles require different qualities of person? What
were he positive qualities you saw in Siwale when you championed his SC membership?
Kasch:
Nobody really understands what it is like to be the Vice Delegate until they actually take the position. That was how I felt. I knew I had less knowledge on the SC and the duties of the VD because I had never been in the position before but now I have 4 months behind me, and it is a good start for my platform.
I don't think I was naive or wrong to run for Vice Delegate in May because I was confident and hopeful for the new term and what I could learn from being in the position. I haven't made any assumptions about being Vice Delegate, I knew it would be no easy task and I was right. Not a lot has surprised me, however, because being Vice Delegate is not exactly going to be a job in which a lot of things change.
I guess something I did not take into account when I ran in May was how much of a role the Vice Delegate played in the WADP. It shares a direct link to endorsements and the Vice Delegate was a much bigger player in that game than anything else.
I don't think you were wrong or naive to run, I was just asking if there were any assumptions or beliefs you had about the role back then that you learned were wrong once you were in the job. Put another way, I wanted to get a sense of what you thought the job was and what it entailed prior to taking office, because I believe all serious candidates for office go into their campaign knowing at least the basics and understanding on a fundamental level what it is they will be tasked with doing should they win. You sort of touched on this, but you mentioned the job not being one where a lot of things change. Would you say you feel constrained by the role of Vice Delegate? Is there no area you feel can be improved or enhanced depending on who holds the office? If it's static, what difference does it make if you or Siwale, or heck, even Hong Kong wins?
Kasch:
The chances of Siwale, who would have been added to the very bottom of the Line of Succession if they were admitted to the Council, rising through the ranks and having to serve as Vice Delegate or WA Delegate in the case of a crisis are so small they may as well be zero. It is like hiring an intern because they potentially might have to be a manager if everyone else in the company quits or cannot work. It's not impossible, but it just isn't going to happen. My judgments were based on the assumption that Siwale would not be moving from the bottom anytime soon. Sorry if that assumption was incorrect.
I said you had answers full of fluff, but honestly a lot of these were pretty snarky, like that one. When you suggested Siwale join the SC, you did so in part expecting he would not advance to the top of the line of succession? Why would you support an applicant you did not believe capable of possibly serving as Delegate, or serving with others who are in no small part former Delegates and Vice Delegates? That is elite company, so even if you didn't think LoS would be a big deal, wouldn't it still matter what kind of caliber the candidate has? Why would someone be worthy of serving on the SC but not up to the job of Vice Delegate?
Kasch:
I was fairly impressionable before I was elected and reluctant to give up the ticket because of something that I did not know a lot about, but I believe Pallaith is an excellent Delegate and, in hindsight, I do not think I would have worked well in a dynamic where Tomb is WAD and I am VD.
That election was close before the fallout, Bootsie >.>
I appreciate that sentiment, and I am glad you said it because it gives me a chance to speak similarly to you now. As I said before, I have worked with you this past term and have seen you grow in the role. I'm sure you may get the idea that with these questions I am opposed to your continued service as Vice Delegate. I am not. But you got a free ride last election and there were some deficiencies I wanted to address. You are wielding your incumbency like a club and glossing over many of these questions. I want you to make as clear and strong a case as you can for this vital office. We only get better with time, and another term in office will allow you to grow more confident and capable in the role. You have proven that you can do it. I think whether someone votes for you or Siwale, depends on the policy debate you guys have been having. I'm trying to get you to articulate that while calling out the style and the other, more distracting parts of the campaign I observed. It's meant well, I assure you. You have been easy to work with and I know another 4 months will see us continue to collaborate on good terms. Please I hope you see these questions not as something discouraging, but as an opportunity to improve yourself and to paint a clearer picture for the prospective voters.
