|
|
|
The East Pacific brought to you by, | |||||||||||||
|
Social
Roleplay
|
|
| Welcome to The East Pacific. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you may register an account here! I'm registered. Where do I start? When you sign up on our forums, your account may be limited to certain forums, and unable to make requests in our roleplay section. We recommend that you Apply for Citizenship to gain all the benefits of being part of our roleplay community! |
| Secondary Endorsement Cap Reform Act | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Aug 30 2010, 04:39:31 PM (809 Views) | |
| Free Pacific States | Aug 30 2010, 04:39:31 PM Post #1 |
|
Number One Drone
|
The Secondary Endorsement Cap Act, though a good idea, faced considerable opposition because of the specific wording of its provisions. To address this concern, I do hereby propose the Secondary Endorsement Cap Act.
|
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| SCKnightVulshain | Aug 30 2010, 11:31:44 PM Post #2 |
|
The Boll Weevel
|
Looks good. |
| Confederacy of Vulshain | |
![]() |
|
| Nalt | Aug 31 2010, 06:20:45 AM Post #3 |
|
DO NOT WANT!!!!!!
|
A telegram to who in (d) of section iv? |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Aug 31 2010, 06:32:23 AM Post #4 |
|
Number One Drone
|
Good call. I've edited in "the delegate." |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| Jacob Clinton | Aug 31 2010, 12:11:17 PM Post #5 |
|
Charles Atlas Seal of Approval
|
Looks good to me. Does anyone have a problem with this? |
|
I am Sauron. HEAR MY ROAR!!! Just kidding it's me, Jacob. -Jacob Clinton Now you've got ba-ba-ba-ba burnt face. HAHAHAHAHAHA!-Annoying Orange | |
![]() |
|
| Nalt | Aug 31 2010, 03:37:02 PM Post #6 |
|
DO NOT WANT!!!!!!
|
Okay that earlier comment was rushed so that was just the most obvious thing... Now I have two questions: The way the act is worded now as far as I can tell someone who moves nations around a lot and has had a nation in TEP for years, but has not had the same nation within the region for more than a couple months would be ineligible. This probably isn't really a problem, since even though that's how I've always behaved (constantly moving puppets in all regions) up until the point I retired from R/D the endo cap never would have mattered to me since my WA status changed so often I never would have gotten near 80. I'm not saying it needs changed just wondering if it was intentional? Also, for the sake of simplicity I think we should add something allowing the WFE to simply state the endo-cap as the primary cap. I think it would just less confusing for newer/less involved players. I'm guessing that was also the intention seeing as the second endorsement cap isn't mentioned in the WFE now even though it is law but including it might be smart so that no one can complain down the road that it should have been. |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Aug 31 2010, 03:55:48 PM Post #7 |
|
Number One Drone
|
On the first point, that's a great question, and I've no answer. I didn't come up with the idea, just proposed a better legal version of it. As for the WFE, this law doesn't require the Delegate post the secondary limit, nor does any other law, so this shouldn't have any effect. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| Oh My Days | Sep 2 2010, 03:36:52 PM Post #8 |
![]()
You got blood on my Suit.
|
I've got nothing specifically against this act, but I am against tiered endorsement caps in general. One of the many problems with influence is that feeders in particular end up with cliqued governments, where established players end up going inactive as they don't need to compete with newer players. I understand that endorsement security is important, but if a secondary cap is necessary then this should be explained, as we already have Viziers to prevent a delegate going rogue. As I understand it, a secondary cap was desired because it's awkward to ask well-trusted people to stop tarting, and not for any security reason. Well, that is the principle of equality before the law - one that we should uphold. If what we really want is a general liberalisation of endorsement law, then let's go for that. Secondary endorsement caps do nothing to deter invaders, as a serious invader would want to spend a year or more in the region before attempting a coup anyway, to build up influence, both coded and personal. |
|
Skype name: ohmydays4 MSN/email: nsomd1@hotmail.co.uk | |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Sep 2 2010, 08:25:10 PM Post #9 |
|
Number One Drone
|
That is a good argument but my counter is that this proposal is not to create a Secondary Endorsement Cap, merely to reform the current one, so as to ensure its functionality. Your argument, I'd say, is pretty fair, and I might support the repeal of such. But, if we don't repeal it, I'd like to make sure its codified well. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| Der Fuhrer Dyszel | Sep 2 2010, 10:23:52 PM Post #10 |
|
Cool like Snakes
|
This clause is not for forum members only, it is for members like Nylter who are not active on the forums but have been incredibly active on our RMB and deserve some recognition for their contributions. People who love TEP as a region but have no interest in getting involved in regional politics. It is a priviledge to those who contribute and have put in a year's time. You speak of creating cliqued governments, but the endorsement cap does not allow for cliqued governments anymore than this Magisterium does. The idea of the cap is for any member of TEP to gain more influence thus further preventing rogue governments from taking control. Those people who put a years time into TEP are less likely to overthrow it. And those people who gain that influence have more power in the region and can actually prevent some raider from coming in and booting everyone. It will cost a raider too much influence to boot long term members thus ensuring that our community is protected because any one of them with their influence can easily endo swap and overtake them. We are giving power to the people and removing it from the government's control entirely with this proposal. By allowing any and all regional members who have been actively involved in TEP on some scale to gain much more influence, we remove the ability of the government to influence their decisions and enforce their own personal agendas. And you know.....I have to disagree about the serious raider business you propose. As a former defender and one of the main players who took over TEP with The Empire, I have to say, that was not planned over a year's duration. Serious invaders get bored sitting in a region for a few months, yet alone a year? And those that have usually convert to active members of the region they attempt to overthrow. Kudos to anyone who actively engages in our community! I am just saying, I think your idea of raiders taking power is one of extreme paranoia. From my experience in this game, you have to be more that a serious raider to pull that off.....almost a psychptically obsessed one. And if you are that ambitious to seize control of an entire region for a few days when they realize you are a raider....wow, kudos for all the contributions you gave TEP in the process! I mean even if we let a raider become our delegate, do you know what a feeder delegate even does? It's insane to assume that a raider can do much damage at all in a feeder. Feeders have a remarkable ability to collective rebound against those people. The raider delegate would last maybe a week at the utmost before someone gained enough endorsements to overthrow him. That is....if he does abandon ship for the sheer ridiculous nonsense that comes with feeder delegacy. You guys have that position overglorified....believe me, it's not the shining pretty sparkly position of great unlimited power you believe it to be. It's one of the worst jobs you can have in this game, next to NS mods. ![]() |
|
Official Approval by Terasu MASTER OF PSYCHOSODOMY You can't ignore my girth. Terasu: "Well done DFD you imploded the universe" :lol: ![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Der Fuhrer Dyszel | Sep 2 2010, 11:38:34 PM Post #11 |
|
Cool like Snakes
|
Addendum.... I just wanted to add that unless you were ever a delegate, you need to really stop to consider some things. WFE's....those things you think that everything should be put it, has very limited space. You can barely fit in the base formalities without running over the limited of character space. Feeders need to post their adspum rules, viziers/old guard/who to endorse, forums, and endorsement cap. That alone takes up most of your character space limitations. You also do realize it was my incessent bitching about how small the WFE was that prompted the push to increase the character limit. Just saying, it does have limited space and all... Unnecessary information that can be discussed in a thread should NOT be placed into it. ![]() I mean, don't make it harder for the delegates than it needs to be. And if you think the job is a stroll in a park, run for this term. The delegate is our friend, not our enemy, and it is a damn hard job to do alone.....don't trash your delegate. I feel like you guys are throwing your delegates under a bus and we in the East do not tolerate that. Maybe that stuff works in TWP, but not here. It is a hard job, we should support delegates.![]() |
|
Official Approval by Terasu MASTER OF PSYCHOSODOMY You can't ignore my girth. Terasu: "Well done DFD you imploded the universe" :lol: ![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Sep 6 2010, 04:02:57 PM Post #12 |
|
Number One Drone
|
So...yeah. I go back to original point: this isn't a debate on whether to have a second cap. Its a debate on whether to reform the codification of the current cap to ensure enforceability. Regardless of your opinion on the cap itself, I'm sure no one here supports maintaining the law in its current form, given concerns stated last session regarding it. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| Nalt | Sep 7 2010, 12:22:25 AM Post #13 |
|
DO NOT WANT!!!!!!
|
Well, I do like this version of the law better than the original. But, I think we should make sure everyone still wants the rule before we amend it, since it would just be waste of time to fix the wording and then decide whether or not to keep it. I think that is a valid debate, and I have a lot more to say about what DFD and OMD were talking about, but, I won't say it now since the debate is apparently just supposed to be about this version v. the old version. |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Sep 7 2010, 07:38:52 AM Post #14 |
|
Number One Drone
|
If you want to have that debate, all you need to do is propose a bill to repeal the Secondary Endorsement Cap. But, this bill is about rewriting the current cap, not about getting rid of it. So, essentially, yeah -- the debate in this thread should center on current version versus this version. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Sep 13 2010, 01:42:35 PM Post #15 |
|
Number One Drone
|
This has now been open for a significant amount of time. My question: do we want to vote on it? Or should I go ahead and archive it? |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Oct 2 2010, 02:58:55 PM Post #16 |
|
Number One Drone
|
Alright. Considering that a significant amount of time has passed. I motion to vote. At the very least, let's vote this down, so I can formally record it as done. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| East Malaysia | Oct 2 2010, 09:59:43 PM Post #17 |
|
Laugh hard. Run fast. Be kind.
|
Oh wow I had forgotten about this... |
|
Question with Boldness >Sovereign Empire of East Malaysia [url]East Malaysia @ NSWiki[/url] - WIP The Eastrovia Times wwt.et.em Embassy - Coming Soon Character List - Updating Soon >Forum Support ![]() >>>Forum Descriptions Rework<<< >>>Tapatalk Migration Information<<< #forum-help-center \ Mod/admin requests \ Board Rules \ Internet Safety & You \ ZB TOS & TOU Emergency Contact: east.malaysia@mail.theeastpacific.com (forwards directly to my personal email)
| |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Oct 3 2010, 12:26:57 AM Post #18 |
|
Number One Drone
|
Erm, need the motion to be seconded before we can vote. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| East Malaysia | Oct 3 2010, 01:01:29 AM Post #19 |
|
Laugh hard. Run fast. Be kind.
|
I second the motion. Sorry I misread what you had said.
|
|
Question with Boldness >Sovereign Empire of East Malaysia [url]East Malaysia @ NSWiki[/url] - WIP The Eastrovia Times wwt.et.em Embassy - Coming Soon Character List - Updating Soon >Forum Support ![]() >>>Forum Descriptions Rework<<< >>>Tapatalk Migration Information<<< #forum-help-center \ Mod/admin requests \ Board Rules \ Internet Safety & You \ ZB TOS & TOU Emergency Contact: east.malaysia@mail.theeastpacific.com (forwards directly to my personal email)
| |
![]() |
|
| SCKnightVulshain | Oct 3 2010, 01:20:30 AM Post #20 |
|
The Boll Weevel
|
Since the motion has been seconded, I hereby vote: AYE in favor of the act. |
| Confederacy of Vulshain | |
![]() |
|
| East Malaysia | Oct 3 2010, 02:49:02 AM Post #21 |
|
Laugh hard. Run fast. Be kind.
|
For |
|
Question with Boldness >Sovereign Empire of East Malaysia [url]East Malaysia @ NSWiki[/url] - WIP The Eastrovia Times wwt.et.em Embassy - Coming Soon Character List - Updating Soon >Forum Support ![]() >>>Forum Descriptions Rework<<< >>>Tapatalk Migration Information<<< #forum-help-center \ Mod/admin requests \ Board Rules \ Internet Safety & You \ ZB TOS & TOU Emergency Contact: east.malaysia@mail.theeastpacific.com (forwards directly to my personal email)
| |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Oct 3 2010, 04:41:33 PM Post #22 |
|
Number One Drone
|
Consider the motion recognized as of the moment of the second. We'll vote for 72 hours from that moment. AYE |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| North Harmoneia | Oct 5 2010, 12:33:00 AM Post #23 |
|
Kilroy was here
|
AYE (I hate that I don't get an e-mail notification for pms. :P) |
![]() ![]() ![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Free Pacific States | Oct 6 2010, 09:05:30 AM Post #24 |
|
Number One Drone
|
72 hours have expired. By a vote of 4-0 with 3 abstentions, the act passes, having received the support of a majority of the Magisterium. |
| The Federated Alliance of Free Pacific States | Lyon Republic | Republic of Xiopothos | East Pacific Treaty Organization | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Archive: Magisterium · Next Topic » |









Sorry I misread what you had said.





7:46 PM Jul 10