Hulldom for VD: The North Star Rises Again

The last few months of my life since I left the Delegacy have been absorbed in the wonderful world of data from American correctional institutions. I’ve learned that Arkansas for instance, still has massive working prison farms. You can find out their crop yields simply by finding the correct report on the Arkansas Department of Corrections website. I’ve learned that, in prisons near the capital city of Bismarck, North Dakota tries to use to “Nordic Model” of corrections supervision with comparatively more freedom and choice for inmates selected into the program (these are decidedly not maximum security level inmates). I’ve also found that these Departments of Correction are notoriously touchy, often unresponsive unless you poke them in just the right way, and many states seek to repel, rather than encourage, openness. In some sense, the Corrections information system can feel like the Vice Delegacy.

What we, as Vice Delegates former, will say is we collect data. Not all of it is in the form of numbers but it often is. We continually tinker, we continually think through how things might be different if we move such and such a piece on the board. It requires an active, strategic mind, it also requires knowledge of the field of play. And more importantly, it requires experience to back it up. And it is because of that that I offer myself as a candidate for the Vice Delegacy once again.

My first and most resolute priority is trying to be transparent about the activity of the Security Council insofar as possible. I don’t want to be like West Virginia and try to foreclose basically everything on the grounds of “it’s classified”, there are compromises to be made. To that end, I will make it my first priority to clear the backlog of any discussions unreleased so far as quickly as I can into the term. It’s not much, but it is…well, work. The second thing I intend to do is to try and start clearing the SC Discord backlog. Now, this will take more time. Insofar as I can, I intend to break the Discord logs into more manageable chunks (we’ll see, my current thinking is like a month or so) so that both redactor(s) and the subjects of those logs can more readily digest what’s being said, identify problem points, and get things moving. I intend to get through as much of that as my RL allows these next couple months.

Secondly, on the point of reports. When I was Vice Delegate in the September to December 2022 term, I tried to get reports out as close to weekly as possible. That is still my goal as it pertains to reports. Weekly reports are, in my mind, essential, not just for keeping the public updated but for demonstrating an ongoing commitment to serve.

I’m not going to sugarcoat this here for anyone, it will be a transition with me if elected. I have had the distinct pleasure the last couple months of serving with both the North Pacific Army (recently promoted to Sergeant, partially because I do not tag raid by my own personal predilections) and the Wardens (I haven’t advanced past regular Warden status, don’t worry). That is to say, I have at least some small measure of experience serving on the front lines of our conflict with the Brotherhood of Malice and the Communist Bloc. We haven’t won every encounter, we won’t every encounter, but we will win the war. This means though that, due to my lateness to this game, I will require time to “get up to speed” endorsements wise. This is a process I am already beginning and will continue as long as it takes. I plan to liaise with the outgoing Vice Delegate, previous Vice Delegates, and the Security Council going back to the time when our tech infrastructure went kaput to better understand the challenges commensurate with keeping an active tarting regime and how I can both help that and how I can get where I needed to be.

When I was Vice Delegate initially, I recall some advice I received from Dreadton, not to overload people by sending them too many notifications or TGs. As it stands, I also plan to try to keep up the twice a week mass endorsement seeking campaigns I did when I was Vice Delegate in the past, so as to better facilitate, and hopefully speed up, the transition and bring up our overall Security Council numbers.

The centerpiece of my campaign is also the most complicated part of it (notice a trend with me?), keeping a bright watch on our enemies. The reason I believe I am the best choice over my competitors at this moment is because none of them have the same toe-to-toe experience with our foreign enemies that I do. None of them talk to as many of them as I do. And throughout that I have learned that, for all their posturing, they’re all fairly predictable, even if you can’t necessarily predict the exact moment they’ll strike. Put simply: a vote for me is a vote for institutional knowledge of the enemy to be back on the Security Council, it’s a vote to have the rolodex of people and information I’ve acquired over my time on this game in the myriad different regions I’ve been in back on the SC, and it’s a vote to aid the SC in both identifying and reacting to the threats we face.

A misleading-ish subsection header, but what I went with. One of the reasons I think my previous forays into NS politics have ended so poorly is because I tend to think like a politician and not as [redacted], the human behind Hulldom. I’m here to have fun, right? So how do I intend to make this second-ish go round seeking elected office in TNP fun?

Well, for starters, I want to return to what made it sort of fun last time: interacting with our gamesiders, reintegrating myself into that community (even if it hasn’t changed much), and finding ways to support our mission there. Whether that’s crowd control, helping the GAs by boosting engagement with the things they put out (daily questions anyone?), or even just being present, I want that part to feel less like a chore.

I also want the backstage parts to feel less like a chore. Of course I’ll be there for the Delegate to provide advice at their pleasure, but I also want to find ways to make things fun for the SC and myself. And while I’ve got nothing concrete there, I want to leave this term not just with the notion I did the job, but that “damn, I had a ton of fun and really helped build community while doing it.”

So, I want to address a couple of things here not because they necessarily are even planks of my campaign, but because they address a couple of questions some of you might have:

1. What have I been up to? Many things. Beyond R/D, I wrote a commendation of my good acquaintance SherpDaWerp in the interim between April and now. I wrote memoirs you can read (at your peril, I acknowledge I’m a very stream of consciousness writer in memory), I’m in the process of writing issues. I’ve continued to provide advice when I feel it appropriate and continued to keep in touch with the many friends and acquaintances I’ve made in the GP sphere.
2. What should I think about what happened back in April? My earnest opinion on this is that memory is a social beast. I’m not going to begrudge anyone for thinking whatever they do think about it–traitor, fallen hero, misguided lunatic. There is a part of me that has moved on and part that hasn’t, but it won’t affect me as Vice Delegate in doing the job at hand–better providing for our safety and security as an in-character community of nations striving for a better future for all our people–Hulldomian and Kaschovian and all the rest.
3. Will you seek out future opportunities for service? The short answer: it depends. As it stands, I would not willingly seek to serve in the Delegacy again (I will do so if, God forbid, the next Delegate must stand down and even then only until the Regional Assembly elects a successor), but any future office will depend on whether I feel my time constraints in a week are compatible with doing the job and doing it well. One of the things I’ve tried to stress to myself and done an alright job with is finding a “work-life balance”, while I will not give up this office in this term if elected unless forced out or I am quite literally incapable of discharging my duties, I do want to make sure that one of the major issues from last time, that I simply was incapable of doing much more than NS while keeping up with RL, is not an issue.

While I hope that I can earn your support, I totally understand that many of you will have concerns that are just a step too far for you to consider a vote for Hulldom right now. I understand that. However, if there is any question I can answer, any concern you want to raise (beyond endorsement numbers, I’m aware and #WorkingOnIt), please feel free to reach out in any of the varied ways you can reach me–Discord, nation TG, ping on the RMB, this thread, or in any of TNP’s fora.

Thank you for reading,
Hulldom

Hulldom:

Secondly, on the point of reports. When I was Vice Delegate in the September to December 2022 term, I tried to get reports out as close to weekly as possible. That is still my goal as it pertains to reports. Weekly reports are, in my mind, essential, not just for keeping the public updated but for demonstrating an ongoing commitment to serve.

Click to expand...

Your opponent, Chipoli, sparked the idea of doing a mid-week report. What are your thoughts on this?
Do you expect there to be moments when you might miss a weekly report due to RL circumstances? If yes, how will you try to remedy this, or will you just continue without doing something extra to compensate? Both options are, in my opinion, completely valid.

Hulldom:

Facilitating A Smooth Transition​

Click to expand...

One of my louder critiques of your opponent was that he started without any endorsements. You face the same challenge. Do expect the transition to be long and hard? Do you find yourself capable enough to get your endorsement count high enough within a reasonable amount of time?

Hulldom:

Put simply: a vote for me is a vote for institutional knowledge of the enemy to be back on the Security Council, it’s a vote to have the rolodex of people and information I’ve acquired over my time on this game in the myriad different regions I’ve been in back on the SC, and it’s a vote to aid the SC in both identifying and reacting to the threats we face.

Click to expand...

Can you give us some examples?

Hulldom:

Keeping It Fun​

Click to expand...

I like this. My own motto is "I play this game to have fun", so I can relate.

Hulldom:

I want that part to feel less like a chore.

Click to expand...

How will you do that?

Hulldom:

And while I’ve got nothing concrete there

Click to expand...

Along what lines were you thinking? Will you be brainstorming with the Security Council, and possibly even the Executive, to allow for more creative freedom and more ideas to come your way?

Overall, solid campaign. Break a leg and all that.

Halsoni:

Your opponent, Chipoli, sparked the idea of doing a mid-week report. What are your thoughts on this?
Do you expect there to be moments when you might miss a weekly report due to RL circumstances? If yes, how will you try to remedy this, or will you just continue without doing something extra to compensate? Both options are, in my opinion, completely valid.

One of my louder critiques of your opponent was that he started without any endorsements. You face the same challenge. Do expect the transition to be long and hard? Do you find yourself capable enough to get your endorsement count high enough within a reasonable amount of time?

Can you give us some examples?

I like this. My own motto is "I play this game to have fun", so I can relate.

How will you do that?

Along what lines were you thinking? Will you be brainstorming with the Security Council, and possibly even the Executive, to allow for more creative freedom and more ideas to come your way?

Overall, solid campaign. Break a leg and all that.

Click to expand...

Just quoting this as a whole rather than trying to break it up as I’m now on mobile.

1. I don’t necessarily think it’s worth it to try to do multiple in a week unless there’s something awful pressing that needs addressing. Like, if I were within striking distance of the SC for the first time, yeah, maybe I’d consider it, but overall, I don’t see the value in trying to do multiple a week.

2. There’s nothing that necessarily stands out as preventing me from doing so at the moment, but is more a nod to “I may be busy on Sunday with something work/school-related, and it may not happen until Monday or Tuesday.” Basically my mantra will be “get it out as soon as you can” if I can’t do it at the one week mark, but playing it totally by ear.

3. I expect the transition to be long and hard insofar as I’m just having to stay on top of tarting and put a good bit more effort in than last time. And absolutely, endotarting is something I would count as one of my strengths.

4. I perhaps am missing something, an example of what?

5. Simply going at it with the perspective of being there because I want to be and not because I have to be, trying to be cognizant of the rules and enforcing them without being a complete stickler in edge cases. That sort of thing.

6. Really it’s the sort of collaborative brainstorming I do have in mind. I don’t think the SC has a visibility problem after the events of 2023, but I do think we could all stand to have a good bit more fun and we can better do that by working together.

Thank you for the swift response!

Hulldom:

4. I perhaps am missing something, an example of what?

Click to expand...

You say you have quite a lot of knowledge about our enemies. Can you give an example of what you know of our enemies that might be useful in the war effort?

Halsoni:

Thank you for the swift response!

You say you have quite a lot of knowledge about our enemies. Can you give an example of what you know of our enemies that might be useful in the war effort?

Click to expand...

Likely not publicly, but having interacted quite a bit with senior members of raider leadership, it’s fairly easy to see what’s bluster vs. actual threat. Long story short: I remember telling Ghost privately in mid-2022 that I was worried about a tip.

I am obviously asking in my capacity as a RA voter, not as supervisor of this election nor as minister. All my questions are the same as to both those running for D and those running for VD, on the off-chance (never say never) of the VD having to step up.

1. What is the definition of TNP having "won" the war? Or "lost" the war? Or is this just going to be ongoing? Do we have clear goals on drawing a line on when to call it "won/lost/stalemate"?

2. How do we protect our smaller friendly partners? Not just The Wellspring, but also IDU, Taijitu and all the other friends of ours.

3. Do we have a KPI on recruitment? Say (as Ruben says) aim for D endo to go back up to 1,000?

4. "Forgive" might be too strong a word, but do we plan to mend relations with TSP any time soon?

5. (For VDs only, Hulldom already answered partly): is this a stepping board for running for Delegate?

Simone:

I am obviously asking in my capacity as a RA voter, not as supervisor of this election nor as minister. All my questions are the same as to both those running for D and those running for VD, on the off-chance (never say never) of the VD having to step up.

1. What is the definition of TNP having "won" the war? Or "lost" the war? Or is this just going to be ongoing? Do we have clear goals on drawing a line on when to call it "won/lost/stalemate"?

2. How do we protect our smaller friendly partners? Not just The Wellspring, but also IDU, Taijitu and all the other friends of ours.

3. Do we have a KPI on recruitment? Say (as Ruben says) aim for D endo to go back up to 1,000?

4. "Forgive" might be too strong a word, but do we plan to mend relations with TSP any time soon?

5. (For VDs only, Hulldom already answered partly): is this a stepping board for running for Delegate?

Click to expand...

1. I think that, ultimately, is up to the Regional Assembly and the Delegate to decide. I think the main criteria for me is frustrating their ability to do offensive operations and removing what little political power base they have. How we go about doing any of that, though, is a question for the Delegate.

2. This is ultimately an interesting question because I think this is actually an area that the VD could provide some help for the Government if the Delegate wants it. Ultimately it consists of: (1) where applicable, active Executive Governor with no Executive WA Delegate, (2) where (1) still holds, encourage them to remove BC from the auto-powers given to the Delegate. For our friendly frontiers, work with them to devise suitable endorsement caps or security regimes upon request and help to implement them if asked.

3. I’m not entirely sure what you mean by KPI. I think Ruben’s goal is an admirable one, sure, but I think that behooves us to think critically about what that would actually require. Generally, we hover around a 67-75% endorsement rate, occasionally a little lower, a little higher at times. When we only have ~1,125 (yesterday when I went through and endorsed everyone, it stood at about 1,121), were in line with historical norms and to get back to 1,000, we probably need to see WA numbers blossom to about 1,350 on some extreme back of the hand math? That’s not just a recruitment thing, that means that the Vice Delegate, the SC, and everyone else needs to be pushing WA membership insofar as possible. (While obviously allowing for people to do the NPA, etc.)

4. As the person most directly affected by TSP’s actions, so long as we don’t rush into being solid dance partners right away, I see no reason why we ought not try. Over time though, TSP are arguably our most natural partner among our fellow feeders and it’s a shame that relations broke down.

5. If I were asked to serve in the role in an interim capacity I would do so, but I do not presently plan on running for Delegate in the foreseeable future.

Glad to see you running for office again. What motivated you to join TGW?

Comfed:

Glad to see you running for office again. What motivated you to join TGW?

Click to expand...

Back when I was really enthused about mil GP (still am, but significantly more then than now), I was looking for a place that would be active, wasn’t particularly likely to push me up the ranks quickly (I didn’t want that), and fit in with more of my predilections. I’ve never been very shy about the fact that given the choice between the two, I prefer the defenders, and when I joined, it seemed like an opportune time, given I had no responsibilities to speak of and was only playing for me, to try out life there.

In which regions do you currently reside and hold citizenship, excluding puppet regions?

Halsoni:

In which regions do you currently reside and hold citizenship, excluding puppet regions?

Click to expand...

Citizenship, depends on how you define it, but presently three (maybe a fourth?)

The Pacific—Aristide
Europeia—Inishmaan
here
TGW—Boston Castle

All my other existing nations are puppets and are in sanctioned jump points or used as influence-accumulating sleepers.

Do you think any of these citizenships might cause a conflict of interest? If yes, how will you deal with that?

Halsoni:

Do you think any of these citizenships might cause a conflict of interest? If yes, how will you deal with that?

Click to expand...

Not particularly, and this place comes first if I’m holding office in it. I will try to avoid conflicts of interest if possible, but will absolutely seek to find the best possible way to extract myself and preserve TNP’s dignity and honor.

bro i love your campaign platform, i wish i could vote for you

this is such a refreshing text to read from the same old same platform that everyone always posts up that are just copies of a copy

Verissimus:

bro i love your campaign platform, i wish i could vote for you

this is such a refreshing text to read from the same old same platform that everyone always posts up that are just copies of a copy

Click to expand...

Well thank you, Kasto

In my last VD statement, I mentioned the following:

Fregerson:

While our WA numbers continue to drop with our allied pliers leaving and our NPA soldiers going on their deployments/training, this is probably the true reflection of how the current WA situation is in our region. Gone are the days where the Delegate can go past 1000 endorsements - we have to probably accept that among the 250-300 nations that are not endorsing the Delegate, most of them probably are not involved in WA stuff that much and will never return the endorsement, and that achieving 875-900 native endorsement count is probably what we have to work around with.

Click to expand...

In your answers to Simone regarding WA recruitment, you suggested that "the Vice Delegate, the SC, and everyone else needs to be pushing WA membership insofar as possible", as stated below:

Hulldom:

3. I’m not entirely sure what you mean by KPI. I think Ruben’s goal is an admirable one, sure, but I think that behooves us to think critically about what that would actually require. Generally, we hover around a 67-75% endorsement rate, occasionally a little lower, a little higher at times. When we only have ~1,125 (yesterday when I went through and endorsed everyone, it stood at about 1,121), were in line with historical norms and to get back to 1,000, we probably need to see WA numbers blossom to about 1,350 on some extreme back of the hand math? That’s not just a recruitment thing, that means that the Vice Delegate, the SC, and everyone else needs to be pushing WA membership insofar as possible. (While obviously allowing for people to do the NPA, etc.)

Click to expand...

How feasible do you think this "pushing" is, given how long we took last term to push Kaschovia into the WA Delegacy? How much more gains do you think is something "achievable"? What is your conclusion regarding a feasible number of WA endorsements our delegate should target? And how long, in your opinion, will we need to look for such numbers?

I also note that in the Legal Code as written, Section 5.2 has a particular clause of interest:

Legal Code:

9. The Vice Delegate is responsible for maintaining a minimum endorsement count at least that of the WA Delegate's endorsement count, minus one-fifth of the total number of WA nations in the region. Frontier Vice Delegates are responsible for maintaining a minimum endorsement count at least that of the Frontier WA Delegate’s endorsement count, minus one-fifth of the total number of WA nations in their respective territories of The North Pacific.

Click to expand...

This number currently stands at around 550s (as of writing, it seems to be 552 by my personal count). When placed alongside Clause 22 of Section 5.4 on Reckless Endorsement Gathering, it seems that nations that are currently around 500 endorsements are not able to endotart any further to comply with the Endorsement guidelines. With your plans to increase WA endorsement count in mind, do you think this law as written should be kept? Or should it be changed? If so, what kind of changes would you like to make so that ordinary nations can continue to do their endotarting while ensuring that the regional security is not impacted?

Apologies for responding so late to this. Legitimately slept until almost Noon today then got invited to a late brunch with a friend, so been busy, also been trying to think of a proper response here.

Fregerson:

In my last VD statement, I mentioned the following:

In your answers to Simone regarding WA recruitment, you suggested that "the Vice Delegate, the SC, and everyone else needs to be pushing WA membership insofar as possible", as stated below:

How feasible do you think this "pushing" is, given how long we took last term to push Kaschovia into the WA Delegacy? How much more gains do you think is something "achievable"? What is your conclusion regarding a feasible number of WA endorsements our delegate should target? And how long, in your opinion, will we need to look for such numbers?

I also note that in the Legal Code as written, Section 5.2 has a particular clause of interest:

This number currently stands at around 550s (as of writing, it seems to be 552 by my personal count). When placed alongside Clause 22 of Section 5.4 on Reckless Endorsement Gathering, it seems that nations that are currently around 500 endorsements are not able to endotart any further to comply with the Endorsement guidelines. With your plans to increase WA endorsement count in mind, do you think this law as written should be kept? Or should it be changed? If so, what kind of changes would you like to make so that ordinary nations can continue to do their endotarting while ensuring that the regional security is not impacted?

Click to expand...

Going to go through the questions bit by bit, so consider each number to correspond to a clause with a question mark at the end.

1. I think it's feasible insofar as I think it should be simply us trying to be more visible in pushing it. That doesn't mean we need to be harping on it, but it does mean we need strategies (be that events like Chipoli suggests or other avenues such as personally reaching out to active nations that aren't in the WA) to actually push WA membership. Frankly, I don't think it has much to do with the time taken to push Kasch in the Delegacy and, if anything, is only actually a sign that we should have been more aggressive in promoting the WA on the RMB, etc. in the first place. While obviously not my remit, perhaps there was a point to HA's lists after all.

2. That's honestly something I'm not quite sure of. Obviously we know of cases that are infeasible among active nations (Neonlake and Cleopatra VII, for instance, who are both family of Marcus), but we also can't be quite certain what portion of our non-WA nations are unique. This is really the reason I've shied away from a particular number as the goal beyond "broadly more", because I think there are certain unobservable variables that could confound the solution here.

3. In any case, I think bringing broader numbers up to about 1,200 is certainly doable in the intermediate term. I'd love to get del endos (and my own, eventually) into the range of 900, certainly over 850 again. While I concur with Chipoli that getting to 1,000 absolutely should be the goal, especially if we can make it sustainable, I'm hesitant to give any particular number as a goal only because there's so much we don't exactly know about the wider population that isn't in the WA. Cautiously, let's say 1,200 total WAs and about 875 endos. I know that's in line with what you said, but I think that's spot on and more than achievable. I'd rather underpromise and overdeliver than the opposite.

4. Kind of along the same lines, I think my general goal of "more WAs generally" is a term-long thing. I simply want to have more than where we started. That's a measurable goal, and one I think is reasonable enough given the constraints we have right now in terms of new nation recruitment and, perhaps more importantly, retention.

Alright, that final bit is counted separately here and answered together simply because they're not...as separate as the first set of questions.

5. I think it probably should be kept as written, with the caveat that known actors should be given a bit more leeway in this regard (I think of Simone in particular here). At the end of the day, while we do want endorsements at the highest level possible, we also want to make sure that things can't go off the rails easily. And granted, it's sort of a similar situation to what those of us hovering at around 900 in the summer of 2022 faced too--it's exceptionally difficult to get above that number without some real help, so it also kind of acts as a natural cap beyond security.

Yes, I wrote this out in a Note on my phone before posting it because what a fitting end to…*gestures*. I made a mistake I am very not proud of and whether the apology gets accepted or not, I realized that I can’t do this to the region again. I can’t do this to myself again. I cannot sit here and preach integrity while apparently having so little of it myself that my temper actually gets in the way of my actual goals sometimes. I cannot sit here and tell you all that I would make a competent Vice Delegate when I cannot seemingly build, and perhaps more importantly keep, rapport with all types of people.

So, I’ve withdrawn from the race for Vice Delegate. I’m also, in this forum and perhaps just by virtue of leaving servers and regions and all that, resigning citizenship and, crucially, my Moderator status. I appreciated the opportunity to serve our region in a role I hadn’t ever had the opportunity to elsewhere—perhaps we might consider in the future why someone like me does not have that opportunity often.

To my supporters, those who voted for me, thank you, of course. I do appreciate it, genuinely, the support and the fish. If you are so inclined to cast a ballot now, consider which candidate (if any) can best balance our security needs with their personal predilections. Essentially for that reason, I cannot endorse either candidate.

To TNP, you all are genuinely, writ large, one of the best communities on the internet. I adore you all and I thank you all for the opportunities I have received and the experiences I’ve had here. Perhaps someday I'll learn to play nice with others.