[PASSED]Vice Delegate Check Efficiency Bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sil Dorsett

Sil Dorsett

The Belt Collector
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
TNP Nation
sil_dorsett
Discord
sildorsett
Since I've been Vice Delegate, I've found that the VD check is really inefficient. The VD is expected to perform the security check within three days of the application being made, despite other parties having a much greater amount of time.

The Speaker's check essentially entails ensuring that the oath was taken correctly. They have 14 days to perform this check, and if it fails, the application is dead.

The Administration check ensures that the applicant doesn't have multiple accounts and isn't posting from a mobile, corporate, university, or otherwise shared IP. They have 14 days to perform this check, and if it fails, the application is dead.

The Vice Delegate's check, though, is really just a check of whether we really want a particular applicant to be a citizen, citing security concerns if one fails. It doesn't change the overall 14-day limit. What it does do is put the Vice Delegate in a position where the "Do we want this person to be a citizen" check is in front of the Speaker "oath check" and the Administration "Proxying/Multiing check". A failure here doesn't kill the application; it goes to the RA for confirmation.

The Speaker and Admin checks can be repeated until the applicant passes, but the VD check is one where if there's a legitimate concern, the applicant will never pass. To me, it makes sense to make this the final check, rather than requiring the VD to repeat the check whenever an application is resubmitted after the speaker and/or administration deny it for some fault in the application.

Therefore, I propose the following bill to effectively make the VD check the final check in the sequence, done within three days of the other two checks being done, while also retaining the 14-day overall limit for an application to be processed.

Edit: As per the discussion below, it seems simpler to just extend the VD's time limit to perform the check. New Draft posted.

Vice Delegate Check Efficiency Bill:
1. Clause 5 of Section 6.1 of the Legal Code is amended to read as follows:
5. Forum administration will have 14 days to evaluate the citizenship applicant and verify that they are not using a proxy or evading a judicially-imposed penalty. The Vice Delegate will have 7 days to perform a security evaluation and pass or fail the applicant. The Vice Delegate must consult the Security Council if there is reasonable concern as to whether an applicant should be admitted.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Vice Delegate Check Efficiency Bill:
1. Clause 5 of Section 6.1 of the Legal Code is amended to read as follows:
5. Forum administration will have 14 days to evaluate the citizenship applicant and verify that they are not using a proxy or evading a judicially-imposed penalty. The Vice Delegate will have 37 days to perform a security evaluation and pass or fail the applicant. The Vice Delegate must consult the Security Council if there is reasonable concern as to whether an applicant should be admitted.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

1. Section 6.1 of the Legal Code is amended to read as follows:
Vice Delegate Check Efficiency Bill:
Section 6.1: Citizenship Applications
2. Any resident may apply for citizenship using their regional forum account, by providing the name of their nation in The North Pacific, and swearing an oath as follows:
I pledge loyalty to The North Pacific, obedience to her laws, and responsible action as a member of her society. I pledge to only register one nation to vote in The North Pacific. I pledge that no nation under my control will wage war against the North Pacific. I understand that if I break this oath I may permanently lose my voting privileges. In this manner, I petition the Speaker for citizenship in The North Pacific.
Click to expand...
3. A copy of the laws applicants are pledging to obey must be available to them at all times.
4. An application for citizenship ceases to be valid if at any time the applicant's declared nation in The North Pacific is not located in The North Pacific.
5. Forum administration will have 14 days to evaluate the citizenship applicant and verify that they are not using a proxy or evading a judicially-imposed penalty.
6. The Speaker will have 14 days to evaluate whether the citizenship applicant has sworn the citizenship oath properly.
7. The Vice Delegate must perform a security evaluation and pass or fail the applicant within three days of both Forum Administration approving the applicant's application and the Speaker acknowledging that the applicant has sworn the citizenship oath properly, or within 14 days of the application being posted, whichever comes first. The Vice Delegate must consult the Security Council if there is a reasonable concern as to whether an applicant should be admitted.
8. The Speaker will reject applicants who fail an evaluation by either forum administration or the Vice Delegate.
9. If an applicant is rejected for failing an evaluation by the Vice Delegate, the Regional Assembly shall immediately debate the rejection and will hold a majority vote on whether to uphold it. The vote must begin two days after the rejection occurs.
10. The Regional Assembly may overturn a previous decision to uphold the rejection of an applicant by majority vote.
11. The Speaker will accept all other applicants with valid applications.
12. The Speaker will process applications within 14 days. If an applicant has not been approved or rejected within 14 days of their application being submitted, they will be automatically granted citizenship.
Click to expand...

2. The speaker will renumerate the clauses of Chapter 6 of the Legal Code as needed.
Click to expand...
Section 6.1: Citizenship Applications
2. Any resident may apply for citizenship using their regional forum account, by providing the name of their nation in The North Pacific, and swearing an oath as follows:
I pledge loyalty to The North Pacific, obedience to her laws, and responsible action as a member of her society. I pledge to only register one nation to vote in The North Pacific. I pledge that no nation under my control will wage war against the North Pacific. I understand that if I break this oath I may permanently lose my voting privileges. In this manner, I petition the Speaker for citizenship in The North Pacific.
3. A copy of the laws applicants are pledging to obey must be available to them at all times.
4. An application for citizenship ceases to be valid if at any time the applicant's declared nation in The North Pacific is not located in The North Pacific.
5. Forum administration will have 14 days to evaluate the citizenship applicant and verify that they are not using a proxy or evading a judicially-imposed penalty.
6. The Speaker will have 14 days to evaluate whether the citizenship applicant has sworn the citizenship oath properly.
7. The Vice Delegate will have 3 days to must perform a security evaluation and pass or fail the applicant. within three days of both Forum Administration approving the applicant's application and the Speaker acknowledging that the applicant has sworn the citizenship oath properly, or within 14 days of the application being posted, whichever comes first. The Vice Delegate must consult the Security Council if there is a reasonable concern as to whether an applicant should be admitted.
68. The Speaker will reject applicants who fail an evaluation by either forum administration or the Vice Delegate.
79. If an applicant is rejected for failing an evaluation by the Vice Delegate, the Regional Assembly shall immediately debate the rejection and will hold a majority vote on whether to uphold it. The vote must begin two days after the rejection occurs.
810. The Regional Assembly may overturn a previous decision to uphold the rejection of an applicant by majority vote.
911. The Speaker will accept all other applicants with valid applications.
1012. The Speaker will process applications within 14 days. If an applicant has not been approved or rejected within that time, they will be automatically granted citizenship.
 
Last edited:
My only concern, and I'm not sure it's a major one, is in regards to applications denied near the 14-day deadline. If the Vice Delegate fails someone at the last minute, but the Speaker doesn't see the failure soon enough to deny the application before the deadline passes, the individual in question automatically becomes a citizen.

This is true of the Admin check as well, but there are a couple mitigating factors. One, there have generally been multiple admins available to help with checks (though we are admittedly running on a shoestring these days). Two, the admin checks are for proxying and ban evasion - even if the person is admitted as a citizen, if admins later discover proxying they can (and indeed, are required to) alert the government, and if they discover ban evasion they can reban. But if someone slips in despite being determined to be a coup risk, there are no actions that can be taken to remove them until they actually get caught committing a crime.

I don't think this is a dealbreaker, though I wanted to flag it for consideration.
 
It's a good point, because the speaker does need to acknowledge the pass/fail of the check as part of the process, and running up right to the line certainly isn't ideal. The admin check does have the same issue though, being allowed the 14-day limit. But, it's mitigated by the actions available to the admin as you described. I wonder if there's a better way to tune the bill then. For instance, maybe the VD check time limit should be just a flat 7 days instead, to give the VD some breathing room to be thorough about putting a case together should an unsavory applicant come forward, and/or tolerate a delay from the speaker in checking the oath should that occur. Would also make the bill simpler.

But, if someone recalls the reason the VD check was made a 3-day time limit, then maybe it's still just a case of "Do your job, VD..."
 
The three day time limit was not a subject of debate on the original legislation that created the VD check in 2013. My own thoughts on why it seemed like a reasonable timeframe to me at the time was that it was the first daily responsibility that was being placed on the VD, and no one was quite sure that it would be performed regularly. Also, many RA applications were waiting several days for admin checks at the time. I was prepared for most applications to pass without a VD check, and did not want any applications to be delayed by it. Three days was a short enough period of time that it would not cause delays in processing if the VD wasn't very active.

I would be in favor of increasing the VD check period to seven days, since the standard practice has been for the VD to check applications daily, and three days is not generally long enough to have a serious discussion about an applicant with the SC.
 
May I suggest an oath format change as per the required particulars:

As it reads:

"I pledge loyalty to The North Pacific, obedience to her laws, and responsible action as a member of her society. I pledge to only register one nation to vote in The North Pacific. I pledge that no nation under my control will wage war against the North Pacific. I understand that if I break this oath I may permanently lose my voting privileges. In this manner, I petition the Speaker for citizenship in The North Pacific"

Should formally include a signing term at the end:

"Signed [Leader/Forum Name, Nation name]."

-or-

Be amended to the following format:


"I, [insert Leader Name/Forum Name], pledge loyalty to The North Pacific, obedience to her laws, and responsible action as a member of her society. I pledge to only register one nation to vote in The North Pacific. I pledge that no nation under my control will wage war against the North Pacific. I understand that if I break this oath I may permanently lose my voting privileges. In this manner, I petition the Speaker for citizenship in The North Pacific"
 
Romanoffia:
Long post.
Click to expand...
This does seem like a great idea at first sight though I'm not sure we're discussing changing the oath in this thread. :P
Another flaw with the first oath idea is if the Forum Name is the same of the Nation name. But the second nation isnt too bad. Nevertheless this isn't an oath proposal thread but you can always propose this change in a new thread.
 
Well, I just posted a new draft that just simply extends the timer, so, the oath won't even be touched. Maybe we could split the discussion regarding the oath off onto its own bill?
 
I know this is gravedigging a tad, but I do think that this is something that the Assembly should still consider.
 
The motion for a vote is recognized and this bill is now in a formal debate period for 5 days. As a note, this period can be shortened at the request of the citizen who introduced the proposal. A vote will be scheduled to begin 2 days following the conclusion of the formal debate period.
 
Last edited:
@Dinoium, the only requirement for a Legislative Proposal is that the author of the bill makes a motion for a vote. A legislative proposal does not require a second.

Non-Legislative proposals can be motioned for a vote by any member (not just the author) and those require a second.
 
At the request of the Author, formal debate is now closed and the vote shall begin in two days.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top