[Announcement] With regards to recent citizenship check errors

Fregerson

Secretly here
-
-
-
TNP Nation
PotatoFarmers
Discord
Freg#0420
For context, this was made in response to @Zyvetskistaahn's message on May 20th 2022, UTC date. My subsequent response and acknowledgement was done 7 hours after, owing to time zone differences, and yet owing to various issues relating to real-life problems, I was not able to do a clear and proper audit of all citizenship checks conducted under my time as a Speaker, starting in November 2021, and all the way till today. While this may be a bit later than supposed to be, I don't believe that means that I do not have to complete the promised audit rather, I simplified the process slightly. Instead of auditing all checks, I only went after the failed citizenship checks, and clarified on all those failed citizenship checks and whether they were done properly.

During the check, the following pointers were also noted:
  • Realising that I have effectively taken over without any of the experienced Deputies continuing in my term, there was a few errors in the recording of the citizenship applications that were pending. By normal procedures, for every citizenship application, they would need to record down the date of every check in a designated excel sheet, found in the same file as the citizens roll. However, some of the applications weren't recorded, and the appropriate date of check was also not updated. This caused a bit of problems at first, but the data was later corrected to reflect the correct status of the application.
  • Realising that in the early stages where there were many "sleeping" members, there was some delays in the Speaker's Checks. As such, it was unclear at times whether a particular member was rejected, and therefore, it led to some of the applications slipping through the cracks. An example was @Hoppem, who passed all 3 checks following their application on January 15 this year, but was never masked as such or approved as such.

Therefore, given the above 2 pointers, the Office has and will continue to make it a point to review the citizenship applications daily. Like I have previously mentioned in one of my replies concerning the incident, we will not be doing Speaker's Check as soon as we note the application, unlike before. Instead. the Speaker's Check will now be the last step of the process, after the admin and VD checks. This was done to ensure that the Speaker will always be in a position to explicitly deny an applicant citizenship. This was a collective decision done by the current members of the Office (as well as LD, who just left us as they became Justice), and as such, will remain the policy until I am no longer Speaker, or when otherwise notified. The current team will also be working together to come up with a "duty roster". Why I left this in inverted commas is because this is not intended to be a standard roster like previous Speakers have managed. Instead, all of us will continue to complete daily checks and process RA affairs as and when we are available to do so. If we aren't, then we fall back to this duty roster - the person named on the roster for the day will typically be available on the said day of the week, and any inquires about the Speaker's Office should go to them if necessary.

On to the main topic of concern - what happens to the audit and what came out of it. Among the various citizenship checks done over the past 7 months, there were a total of 71 applications of concern. These 71 applications referred to applicants who applied but 1) didn't pass the checks; and 2) never passed the checks later on. Some applicants may have made multiple applications over this time too. A recheck was done to see if these applications were done correctly, and whether they have been properly rejected. Should they not been rejected, we would then check if they currently fulfill citizenship requirements, and as such, made a decision of whether they would continue to have citizenship.

A full excel collation can be found here. In short, however, while the Speaker's Office made a number of mistakes, we will be awarding citizenship to the following members:
@Emerald (with effect 6th December 2021)
@Emnaria (with effect 9th February 2022)
@Heloon (forum banned, but not gameside banned, and therefore, continues to be a citizen with effect 17th February 2022)
@Tape (with effect 17th April 2022)
@vxeov (with effect 18th April 2022)
@Pinguioris (backdated to 11th January 2019, dated to Wonderess time as Speaker)

There were, in total, 35 applications among the 71 that didn't have a proper rejection put in place. This included one for current citizen Neputne, 2 for Emerald, and 1 for Hoppem (who passed all 3 but wasn't announced as such).

We hoped that this provided a proper closure to this issue, and I will use this thread to entertain only questions/appeals related to this particular audit. Anything else should go in separate threads, either the Speaker's Desk, or my recall thread as proposed by Pallaith.
 
I note that this is a significantly shortened list compared to the list that Deputy Speaker @Vivanco published here a few days ago, as you have only included those who, if they were properly granted citizenship at the time, would have maintained citizenship up to the present day. Will you be removing citizenship from everyone on Vivanco's list who is not also on this list?
 
I note that this is a significantly shortened list compared to the list that Deputy Speaker @Vivanco published here a few days ago, as you have only included those who, if they were properly granted citizenship at the time, would have maintained citizenship up to the present day. Will you be removing citizenship from everyone on Vivanco's list who is not also on this list?
Short answer - yes. Looking at the court review, as well as precedence of the Office, the citizenship would have been backdated to 14 days after their application. As such, 30 days of posting requirements would have been tabulated from there too, resulting in the shorter namelist.
 
Back
Top