Arc For Speaker: New Face For A Better Tomorrow

Status
Not open for further replies.
Arc

Arc

TNP RP's Resident Fluffball of Cringe
-
Pronouns
he/him
TNP Nation
Arcanstotska
ARC
FOR SPEAKER OF THE REGIONAL ASSEMBLY​
Howdy, y’all! My name is Arc and I am here to announce my candidacy for Speaker of the Regional Assembly!

Some of you reading this may already know me, while many more might not. I joined The North Pacific in August of last year, though the vast majority of my time in TNP RP. I will be bluntly honest with informing you all that my experience with TNP government - or NS government gameplay in any sense - is practically nonexistent. Though I will say this: while I may be new to this side of NationStates gameplay, if elected, I am determined to execute the duties of Speaker with utmost determination and with as much efficiency and honest transparency as possible. I believe honesty is a virtue, and it's a virtue I wholly intend to uphold should I be elected as TNP's next Speaker.

In this thread, I will lay out my plan for the Office of Speaker. I hope you all enjoy what I have to offer!​
MY PROMISES FOR THE FUTURE
FREEZE THEM BILLZ!
According to Article 2 of the Legislative Proposal Procedure section of the Standing Procedures for the Regional Assembly,​
2. The associated text of the proposal will be contained in a single quote tag within the opening post of the proposal thread. The citizen who introduced the proposal may alter this text within the opening post at their discretion. This text shall be the official text of the bill.​
Click to expand...
My worry is that this may open the potential for abusing legislation proposals, should anyone be bold enough to do such a thing. This worry of mine is reinforced by Article 4 of the same section.​
4. During the five days after a vote is called for, the citizen who introduced the proposal may continue to amend it. This period, hereafter referred to as Formal Debate, may be shortened at the citizen who introduced the proposal's request. Once Formal Debate has ended, the proposal may no longer be amended, and the Speaker will schedule a vote to begin no fewer than two days hence.​
Click to expand...
A sneaky, crafty legislator might get some trollish idea and sneak an amendment into the legislation right before formal debate closes unless someone were to go and notice the change(s).

This, I believe, should be cause for great concern. If elected, I will move to ensure that a solution is implemented. I would like to propose that proposed bills be frozen during formal debate and that a Deputy Speaker be appointed to consistently check any proposed legislation towards the end of the formal debating period to make sure it matches up perfectly with how it was when it was introduced.

SPEAKER CHECK AFTER, NOT BEFORE
In the words of my opponent, East Isles, "My goal is that the Speaker’s check is the first check completed on as many citizenship applications as possible."

The Speaker needs to be aware of both the Admin and Vice Delegate checks as well, and reject applications that fail one or more of these two checks. If the Speaker's check comes first, and the Admin and/or the Vice Delegate gives a thumbs down, then that first check was all for nothing. All due respect to East Isles, but I think he's more concerned with getting as many citizens accepted as possible as fast as possible rather than making sure we get the right kinds of people as citizens, such as people who can be trusted not to engage in trollish or other sorts of unwanted behaviors. The last time I checked, we're not striving to meet any citizen number quotas. I would like to make sure that the Speaker's check comes after the Admin and Vice Delegate checks. That way, we can be sure we're getting the right people into TNP and not just more people. While some may argue that East Isle's proposal saves time, I would instead argue that speed can lead to even more mistakes.

MAINTAIN THE "STATE OF THE REGIONAL ASSEMBLY" REPORTS
Transparency, I believe, is very important in the governance of any kind. As I've said earlier, honesty is a virtue I intend to uphold should I be elected. As such, I will be maintaining the bi-monthly "State of the Regional Assembly" reports so that TNPers can easily be brought up to speed on the activities of the Regional Assembly in a simple, easy-to-follow manner.​
Should I be elected, the Office of the Speaker will be looking to improve where improvements are needed so that the TNP Regional Assembly flows even smoother and cleaner than before. I humbly ask for your support in this election, and welcome you all to ask questions below!​
 
Pretend that you're a power-mad lunatic out for revenge against all those who have slighted you. How would you abuse the power of the Speaker's Office to destabilize the region?
 
It's refreshing to see a new face that has new ideas that differentiate themselves from the competition. I very much would like to see the path that legislative proposals take be simplified and more time given to the final draft of a bill before it goes to vote. Seems like you have a good handle on that.

The Speaker check coming last makes sense. The whole thing about "conditional citizenship" is brought up for debate here and there, and I can see how it creates double work. The Speaker have fourteen days to process applications. So does administration. I think it was Flemingovia that once had in their signature "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 gets seven. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

One thing I'm sure someone will ask is, "Well, how will people know that their application is being looked at?", which is a fair question. There are plenty of impatient people, and I bet East Isles is thinking "Process fast and don't let prospects walk away." What would be your approach in responding to people who want their checks done faster, or at least their applications acknowledged?
 
Cretox State:
Pretend that you're a power-mad lunatic out for revenge against all those who have slighted you. How would you abuse the power of the Speaker's Office to destabilize the region?
Click to expand...
Bribe the NPA with chocolate-chip cookie dough to help me seize power and declare myself Caesar of The North Pacific.
 
I don't understand the argument about the order of checks. It does not matter if the Speaker check is first or last - all the Speaker check does is verify if the applicant correctly completed the oath and has a nation in the region. That has absolutely nothing to do with the other checks, let alone the quality of an applicant. The other checks don't allow TNP to deny applicants for being trolls or somehow undesirable. If you are advocating for better "quality control" in checks, you're going to need to propose a change to our laws, because we don't have that.

Conditional citizenship is fine. The Speaker is keeping the applicant updated - assuming you pass the other checks you're all good. That's all it means. What repeated work are we concerned with, not having to post again for an applicant to say they are citizens now? Arc, I'm happy to see someone new jumping in and I was honestly impressed with what you put forward, you're taking this seriously and you put in the work. I appreciate that. I would like you to take a closer look at this stuff though, because I suspect when you do, you'll realize your concerns are unfounded or your approach will have to change. If you think quality control is a problem, let's unpack that idea, because the check order will not address it.

As for the standing procedures thing, you're welcome to adjust that however you wish as Speaker. I would ask you though, isn't there a good reason for the bill to continue to be amended after a vote is scheduled? What if he formal debate causes the author to decide to make a change in response to the posts of others? I think it's fine for the Speaker to police last minute, sneaky changes, just be careful you don't lock that down too much.

I appreciate you decided to step up and do this. You're pursuing a job where exact wording, loopholes, and legal shenanigans are common. Lots of people will have their own ideas and will challenge you. If you're up for the challenge, including my observations here, then you may be a good fit for this office. Nice work so far, but I hope you give some additional thought to what you've put forward so far. Good luck.
 
Last edited:
According to a court ruling of 2013 the Speaker has the power to unilaterally table proposals. How would you use that power?
 
Sil Dorsett:
It's refreshing to see a new face that has new ideas that differentiate themselves from the competition. I very much would like to see the path that legislative proposals take be simplified and more time given to the final draft of a bill before it goes to vote. Seems like you have a good handle on that.

The Speaker check coming last makes sense. The whole thing about "conditional citizenship" is brought up for debate here and there, and I can see how it creates double work. The Speaker have fourteen days to process applications. So does administration. I think it was Flemingovia that once had in their signature "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 gets seven. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

One thing I'm sure someone will ask is, "Well, how will people know that their application is being looked at?", which is a fair question. There are plenty of impatient people, and I bet East Isles is thinking "Process fast and don't let prospects walk away." What would be your approach in responding to people who want their checks done faster, or at least their applications acknowledged?
Click to expand...
I suppose hiring a larger team of Deputy Speakers could be the solution to that problem. That way, more applications may be covered simultaneously. A team of five to ten Deputy Speakers, I believe, would be sufficient.
Pallaith:
I don't understand the argument about the order of checks. It does not matter if the Speaker check is first or last - all the Speaker check does is verify if the applicant correctly completed the oath and has a nation in the region. That has absolutely nothing to do with the other checks, let alone the quality of an applicant. The other checks don't allow TNP to deny applicants for being trolls or somehow undesirable. If you are advocating for better "quality control" in checks, you're going to need to propose a change to our laws, because we don't have that.

Conditional citizenship is fine. The Speaker is keeping the applicant updated - assuming you pass the other checks you're all good. That's all it means. What repeated work are we concerned with, not having to post again for an applicant to say they are citizens now? Arc, I'm happy to see someone new jumping in and I was honestly impressed with what you put forward, you're taking this seriously and you put in the work. I appreciate that. I would like you to take a closer look at this stuff though, because I suspect when you do, you'll realize your concerns are unfounded or your approach will have to change. If you think quality control is a problem, let's unpack that idea, because the check order will not address it.

As for the standing procedures thing, you're welcome to adjust that however you wish as Speaker. I would ask you though, isn't there a good reason for the bill to continue to be amended after a vote is scheduled? What if he formal debate causes the author to decide to make a change in response to the posts of others? I think it's fine for the Speaker to police last minute, sneaky changes, just be careful you don't lock that down too much.

I appreciate you decided to step up and do this. You're pursuing a job where exact wording, loopholes, and legal shenanigans are common. Lots of people will have their own ideas and will challenge you. If you're up for the challenge, including my observations here, then you may be a good fit for this office. Nice work so far, but I hope you give some additional thought to what you've put forward so far. Good luck.
Click to expand...
Thank you so much for this advice. I'll take some time and reevaluate my proposals and think things through a little more closely. I suppose the excitement of running had me in a bit of a rush to put a thread out.
Venicea:
According to a court ruling of 2013 the Speaker has the power to unilaterally table proposals. How would you use that power?
Click to expand...
I would only table proposal deliberation should it grind to an unproductive halt and all attempts to get things back on track fail. I don't believe that there's a point in drawing out a discussion if it's going absolutely nowhere, even if it is supposed to be about a legislative proposal.
Fregerson:
In your opinion, does the Speaker have a role in improving regional activity?
Click to expand...
I do not believe that the Speaker should have a role in facilitating and improving regional activity, just to keep track of who is active and who is not. I don't see anything the Speaker could do to improve regional activity apart from pestering people to be more active, which I believe would only push people away from TNP.
St George:
Do you own a dog?
Click to expand...
Yes. She's a German Shepherd and her name is Jane. She is the goodest girl and I will not tolerate disagreement to this declaration of fact.
 
Last edited:
New Francois is barred from holding citizenship. Should he want to regain his citizenship rights, what would be the proper procedure?
 
This is a good platform for someone taking a step into TNP politics for the first time, and should you lose, I'd hope East Isles seriously considers bringing you into the office. In my time working with you in RP and in the Culture Ministry I've known you to be dedicated and enthusiastic and willing to learn. These are all things that will serve you well in your TNP career.

I think the idea of having the Speaker check come after the other checks would require changing the way the Office handles checks - as it stands, the Admin team uses the Pending Citizenship tab of the citizen rolls to help with their admin check, To ensure that this continues, the Office would still need to add these new applicants to the sheet, at which time, surely it would be more efficient to just do the Speaker Check at the same time? It's an idea that merits debate, I think, as I can also see the argument that as it stands, the Office is essentially doing double the work to do the Speakers check and then pass the citizen after the other checks are also done.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top