Bobberino for Speaker: Continuity with Change

[Bobberino]

Bobberino for Speaker: The Right Bob for the Job!

~​

Friends, citizens, countrymen, lend me your ears. I come to run for Speaker, not as your saviour. The positions that men hold live after them; the good intent is oft interred with their careers; So let it be with Bobberino.​

~
​

Hello, TNPers! I'm Bobberino. I'd wager many - or most - of you know me as that guy on the Discord that always seems to be one post away. While being on the Discord is something I highly take pride in and something I plan to keep as a precedent, if you were not aware, I also have an incredibly extensive docket of service in TNP and in broader gameplay. The highlights, locally, are nearly two years in the service of the Speaker's Office over the span of my time in TNP: beginning in July 2018 in ABC's Speaker's Staff, to my most recent terms of service as a more senior, mentorship-oriented Deputy capable of stepping in directly to the Speakership at any moment. But as much as I can ramble about my resume, I shouldn't and won't. Rather, understand that it has been a rewarding experience for both myself as a person and as a player. I have enjoyed my time in the office, and I would like to give back to the office by running for - and hopefully, obtaining - the office of Speaker.

In terms of where I see the office and what has happened in my time in it, I see an office that has morphed and progressed like a well-oiled machine throughout my time in it, in no small part due to the efforts of @St George. In his service in the office, we have cleaned up our act from a group who couldn't run a spreadsheet on time to a synergized, independent group who required little oversight from the Speaker; and assisting me in this effort in leading the Deputy Speakers from within was my primary competitor in this election, @Robespierre. We have established a parliamentary precedent in the RA, and I intend to run the RA in much the same way. We have established a lengthy precedent both recent and in the past, that in our motions, both legislative and non-legislative, mean something and are simply not rubber stamps. Our RA is important, our RA is healthy, and our RA is the center of our region; we would not be the premier region in legislative activity, as accomplished as we are in constitutional stability, and as prominent in international politics without the RA being the way that it is - the beating heart of The North Pacific. I feel as if I have a unique finger on the pulse of our RA; and through it, our region as a whole.

With this out of the way, I will get into specifics. First off, checks. One of the most important jobs the Speaker has, but simultaneously often the first to go by the wayside; I will look to hold my office to a high standard, higher than that of the administration and Vice Delegate checks. While I will not and cannot promise the world - I am not the kind of candidate to lie to you, nor am I one to make fluffy promises - I will aim for things to be so that all Speaker's checks will be done within a minimum of 24 hours. I'd also like to briefly address Deputy Speakers; I am a fan of @St George's innovative approach to Deputies, as it allows for a very large delegation of responsibilities, and allows for me to train in bunches while also allowing for opportunities for up and coming TNPers to see a side of TNP that they otherwise may not see. This can be done through a Speaker's Staff, but I see little reason why the difference should be made. We have de facto senior Deputy Speakers already; there needn't be more random arbitrary divisions in a team that has its job be fairly cut and dry. Through this, I also will modify the schedule for checks being made - I plan to have a schedule where certain Deputies / the Speaker are doing certain tasks on certain days; rather than one deputy / the Speaker handling all tasks on one day. And on a final note on actually appointing Deputies; I'll be reaching out to some people about staying on, or being appointed; but otherwise, I'll have the opportunity around for those who will take it.

As a note in terms of the general run of the office, I'd like to keep the commitment to a major audit / update once a month, from the Speaker's Office to the entirety of the citizenry. If something happens that is of note to the citizenry, that will be addressed in the monthly addresses. I'd also like to state that, without getting into specifics, the Office will be less in the public eye. While I am a fan of transparency, it can be a distraction to the productivity of the region and our democratic processes as a whole.

In summary, I don't intend to fix what isn't broken. I've been around long enough to see what can be tinkered with, however, to ensure the citizens of The North Pacific get the best out of their Speaker's Office, and to see how they want to have their Regional Assembly run. Questions? Comments? Concerns? Fire memes that you insist on posting in this thread? Drop them in this thread. I'd also like to wish my fellow candidates the best of luck, and to all the citizenry of The North Pacific, a happy, healthy, and safe 2021; where hopefully, I stand as your Speaker. This has been Bobberino, signing off.

 

[TlomzKrano]

Tell me more about what your slogan means to you and why its significant to your platform.

 

[Bobberino]

Tell me more about what your slogan means to you and why its significant to your platform.

Awesome question. I intend to continue the office down the path it is on - that path is a path of change. This road is a road it has been on for a long time, and I believe I can oversee an office that can continue to change, but maintain its continuity, health, stability and growth that it has undergone in the past months.

 

[mcmasterdonia]

Did you know that “Continuity with Change” is a meme slogan from the TV show VEEP?

 

[Bobberino]

Did you know that “Continuity with Change” is a meme slogan from the TV show VEEP?

I was actually unaware of that before now. I have never heard of that TV show.

 

[mcmasterdonia]

I was actually unaware of that before now. I have never heard of that TV show.

Oh damn! I thought it might have been deliberate. It’s also been used by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull.

I like the look of you campaign bob and it makes me proud to see you and Robes both stepping forward to run. I’ll try think of some proper questions for you guys

 

[Gorundu]

I was actually unaware of that before now. I have never heard of that TV show.

Uncultured. Lost my vote.

 

[Bobberino]

Oh damn! I thought it might have been deliberate. It’s also been used by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull.

I like the look of you campaign bob and it makes me proud to see you and Robes both stepping forward to run. I’ll try think of some proper questions for you guys

That may be why I have a very vague memory of hearing it somewhere.

Thank you! I'm looking forward to seeing what you've got in terms of questions, and I'm looking forward to answering them.

 

[Bobberino]

Uncultured. Lost my vote.

Wow. Tough crowd.

 

[St George]

Should you win, will you commit to offering your defeated opponents a deputy speaker role in the office?

 

[Comfed]

minimum of 24 hours.

Do you mean maximum?
If your intent was to coup the region, how would you go about doing that?

 

[Oracle]

What is your greatest weakness and how do you intend to address this weakness if elected?

 

[Cretox]

The way things are going, this is going to be a pretty close race between you and @Robespierre. You're both qualified, longtime Deputy Speakers, former Ministers, NPAers, etc. You've both outlined solid visions for the office. So I guess what I'm asking is: Why should voters choose you over Robespierre?

 

[Bobberino]

Should you win, will you commit to offering your defeated opponents a deputy speaker role in the office?

If they would like to serve in that capacity, I would be glad to accept them as a Deputy Speaker. I have the utmost respect for my opponents - hell, I've even praised @Robespierre in the OP - and I believe his contributions to an office led by myself would be monumental.

Do you mean maximum?
If your intent was to coup the region, how would you go about doing that?

Yeah, my bad on the wording there. But with that aside, despite the exhaustion of this question, there is a legitimate reason to cover this in a Speaker's thread and I appreciate you doing that. The reason for this is, as I mentioned, the heartbeat of this region is the RA. With an unhealthy RA, we have an unhealthy region. So the first step, as Speaker, to coup the region, is immediately fix who has 'proper' voting methodology to that of my cronies. Then I have my cronies apply to the SC. When they are inevitably denied, providing they meet constitutional minimums, I will then use this de facto control of RA results to pass overrides of their applications to the SC. Then, I will seek a recall of all existing and uncorrupted SCers, and use the same power to see their demise. If prosecuted by the Court, I will - you guessed it - recall them in this same manner. When this is done, I will do a purge of the EC after appointing my cronies to the EC. Following this is a recall of the flailing Delegate and Vice Delegate, and the first / foremost of my cronies will be Delegate of The North Pacific.

What is your greatest weakness and how do you intend to address this weakness if elected?

An incredible, even if generic, question. My greatest weakness is my inability to diagnose my own weaknesses, and my own strengths. Basically self-evaluation. I intend to have at least one Deputy Speaker with copious prior experience in the office, to allow me proper feedback and criticism that the RA cannot give on an immediate basis.

The way things are going, this is going to be a pretty close race between you and @Robespierre. You're both qualified, longtime Deputy Speakers, former Ministers, NPAers, etc. You've both outlined solid visions for the office. So I guess what I'm asking is: Why should voters choose you over Robespierre?

I figured someone was going to ask this sooner or later. And I've spent quite a bit of time meditating on this, and it became clear to me that Robes and I differ in our approaches to the game, our personalities and at the psychological level. Without going into too much depth, as that would just be creepy, I take a light-hearted approach to the game whilst still being serious when necessary - my career in TNP shows I am more than capable of stepping up to the plate when necessary and delivering on work. The way that this applies to the Speaker's Office is my creative side - I can take what seems purely logical and analytical and make it into a project that can show itself to be more than what the surface shows. If you'd like more clarification on what I mean by this, please do not hesitate to ask me.

 

[Cretox]

Any plans for the Speaker's Staff or similar programs?

 

[Robespierre]

I typically don’t ask questions of my opponents in their campaign threads during an election, but after listening to today’s Town Hall I had a few more that I wanted to ask:

1.) You mentioned being a counterweight to the Delegate’s power in your interview earlier today. Should the Delegate seek to empower themselves further, are you comfortable with the potential for confrontation or the need to be tough and firm on your stances?

If you are: What tone would you take when dealing with an executive that may want to “railroad” bills through the Regional Assembly?

2.) Should the Speaker abstain on most votes facing the Regional Assembly while they’re in office? If so, will you be regularly abstaining during non-legislative votes? Why or why not?

3.) How can a Speaker encourage members to be less complacent even if things seem to be a rubber stamp in practice? Should facilitating debate to occur on the forums be a priority for you? Is that a necessity in the status quo? Is it possible for a Speaker to do this? What’s your take on the matter?

4.) Anything you regret prior to running in these elections? If anything, what would you most like to gain from this experience? How can you grow?

5.) What was your take on the situation surrounding court case that is The North Pacific v. St George? Would you have made the same call that was made by MadJack? Why or why not?

 

[Bobberino]

Any plans for the Speaker's Staff or similar programs?

While not completely off the table, I believe the Speaker's Staff is unnecessary given my plans for Deputy Speakers. I plan to appoint those who apply, in the same vein as past iterations of the Speaker's Staff, and thus the artificial subdivision is unnecessary.

 

[Pallaith]

Bob I got to hand it to you, this isn’t a job I would have thought suited to you but here we are. A race between two deputies who have both put in solid work is going to be interesting to parse, but we got to try, so here’s my contribution (I know you answered these already but it was after the town hall ended so I figured I would give people a chance to see your responses).

What do you think of the previous Speaker’s use of discretion in starting and scheduling votes? Are you going to continue this?

When it comes to the guidelines the office follows, do you think the standing procedures have room to change further? Would this limit how often you have to utilize discretion or do you think it’s better to keep things looser and rely more on your discretion?

 

[Bobberino]

I typically don’t ask questions of my opponents in their campaign threads during an election, but after listening to today’s Town Hall I had a few more that I wanted to ask:

1.) You mentioned being a counterweight to the Delegate’s power in your interview earlier today. Should the Delegate seek to empower themselves further, are you comfortable with the potential for confrontation or the need to be tough and firm on your stances?

If you are: What tone would you take when dealing with an executive that may want to “railroad” bills through the Regional Assembly?

2.) Should the Speaker abstain on most votes facing the Regional Assembly while they’re in office? If so, will you be regularly abstaining during non-legislative votes? Why or why not?

3.) How can a Speaker encourage members to be less complacent even if things seem to be a rubber stamp in practice? Should facilitating debate to occur on the forums be a priority for you? Is that a necessity in the status quo? Is it possible for a Speaker to do this? What’s your take on the matter?

4.) Anything you regret prior to running in these elections? If anything, what would you most like to gain from this experience? How can you grow?

5.) What was your take on the situation surrounding court case that is The North Pacific v. St George? Would you have made the same call that was made by MadJack? Why or why not?

I'll quote this and work my way down using numbers. K? K.

1. Being a counterweight to the Delegate's power does not necessarily mean ensuring they are unable to do anything. Rather, it is to keep the wheels from falling off of the RA by ensuring it doesn't become an immediate rubber stamp to the whims of the Delegate, while simultaneously ensuring that if the Delegate just is that good then progress is not impeded. I am comfortable with standing up to a potential Delegate, should it come to that, but I do not believe I will have to be. I am close with both Tlomz and McMasterdonia and would like to assist them in their goals in the executive as much as possible if elected, and within the confines of the law. Should a railroad of bills come flooding into the Assembly, I will simply address them as needed in terms of scheduling votes. I will, however, ensure there is sufficient time to discuss each one.

2. Personally? It's a tradition that has no point. I will not commit to abstaining during non-legislative votes.

3. I will encourage members to have their voices heard beyond a simple yay/nay because true democracy goes deeper - issues are discovered in the system by open discussion among all citizens, not just the 10 active authors at any one time. It can be scary having your voice out there for all to see in the RA, but I plan to instill and promote an open environment for both newer and older players who are less experienced in discussion of legislation to, y'know, discuss legislation.

4. Pretty obvious: making that ping in the #NPA-Announcements channel a year ago. I've not done anything similar since, and it's helped mature me as a player and as a person.

5. Though I believe MadJack was morally wrong in his decision and would not have done the same, I believe he is on the right side of the law. That was a ruling that shocked me to say the least.

Bob I got to hand it to you, this isn’t a job I would have thought suited to you but here we are. A race between two deputies who have both put in solid work is going to be interesting to parse, but we got to try, so here’s my contribution (I know you answered these already but it was after the town hall ended so I figured I would give people a chance to see your responses).

What do you think of the previous Speaker’s use of discretion in starting and scheduling votes? Are you going to continue this?

When it comes to the guidelines the office follows, do you think the standing procedures have room to change further? Would this limit how often you have to utilize discretion or do you think it’s better to keep things looser and rely more on your discretion?

1. I like MadJack's approach to discretion - use it when necessary or practical, but stick within a tighter framework of the law in general; walking a fine line but working and thinking pragmatically in terms of how the Regional Assembly is run.

2. Can the standing procedures change? Yes, always; times change, situations change and insights we don't have currently come to light in terms of regional politics. I don't, however, think that would limit my ability to use discretion; I intend to have a pragmatic approach to the RA that relies on my ability to make decisions with a certain degree of flexibility.