Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Trending Topics
Regional Information
The East Pacific brought to you by,
Where to Start?

Social
Discord
IRC
Skype
Steam Group

Roleplay
Regional Atlas
In-Character
News Broadcasts
Out of Character

Government
Executive Offices
Delegate: Yuno
Magisterium
Provost: Drachen
Conclave
Viceroy: Aelitia





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!

Username:   Password:
Multiquote ON Multiquote off
Locked Topic
Embassy Act
Topic Started: Aug 17 2011, 01:19:05 PM (2,906 Views)
Carondia
No Avatar
Call me Carondia
In the 9th Magisterium Kelssek proposed a law to allow for the Delegate, or Delegate's appointee, to create, close, or request embassies. I think we should pass a similar law as that never passed due to lack of participation. My new idea is that the Magisterium be given the ability to overrule the Delegate/the Delegate's appointee's decision to create, close, or request an Embassy by Majority Vote.
Citizen of The East Pacific
former Magister of The East Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Kelssek
Member Avatar
Hero of the Soviet Onion
I'm okay with re-tabling this:

___

11th Assembly, Bill MA-1

Citation
1. This Act may be cited as the Embassies Act.

Authority over in-game embassies
2. The authority to grant in-game embassies shall be at the discretion of the Delegate.

Authority over forum embassies
3. The Delegate, or one assigned the authority by the Delegate, shall have the authority to approve or deny requests for embassies on the East Pacific forums.
____

I don't think the Magisterium should be overruling an area which is obviously the Delegate's discretion. This is a lawmaking body, the business of running the region ought to be the responsibility and power of the executive institutions.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Carondia
No Avatar
Call me Carondia
I didn't mean it as the Magisterium taking over the Delegate's domain. I meant it as the Magisterium maintaining a check on the Delegate if they find it absolutely necessary. Again, this would not mean that the Magisterium's approval is necessary but that the Magisterium's dissent is possible.
Citizen of The East Pacific
former Magister of The East Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
SCKnightVulshain
Member Avatar
The Boll Weevel
This is a very touchy area. We have to be extremely careful about how we word this if we do decide to pass it. I was one of the few people who participated in this matter, and even talked with the delegate about it in person (well via MSN Messenger). I believe we should have the input of the delegate (Todd that mean's you) before we move any further. I'll ask him to post here when he comes online.
Confederacy of Vulshain
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Todd McCloud
Member Avatar
Planet Telox
Part of the delegate's job is to represent the region abroad. This doesn't mean he or she has to go into different regions and establish ties with them, but, seeing as he or she is directly tied to the in-game embassies, it makes sense to tie the delegate into the off-site embassies too. That, and it allows for the delegate to choose another person or group to oversee embassies at the delegate's digression.

But I have a question, mostly because I don't really know the answer to it. If there's a delegate who for whatever reason doesn't like embassies and denies all embassy creation, what then? I kind of doubt it would happen, but it doesn't hurt to consider different situations.
"Your uniform doesn't seem to fit. You're much too alive in it."

"You must be the change you want to see in the world" - Gandhi
"The worst prison would be a closed heart." - Pope John Paul II
Vekaiyu's Wiki Page | Ikrisia Levinile's Wiki Page | Listonia's Wiki Page
Online Profile Goto Top
 
Stateless
Member Avatar
Tandy 400
How about this:

  • The Delegate can create Embassies as he/she wishes, UNLESS it is overuled by a 3/4 vote in the Magisterium.
  • The Magisterium can create Embassies with a 2/3 vote.
    [-]The Delegate can veto Embassies formed by the Magisterium.
    [-]If the Delegate vetoes an Embassy, the Magisterium can overrule that veto with at least a 3/4 vote.
Or something like that?

This way, as dictated by the 2nd bullet, even if the Delegate doesn't want any embassies, the Magisterium can still form them, it will just take longer
WhatWhatInTheButt
FORMER: Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Todd McCloud
Member Avatar
Planet Telox
I personally feel that gives too much power outside of the delegate for embassies, but that's just me. I'm not a Magister, just a citizen in here. I'd just suggest this:

The Delegate can approve or deny Embassies as he/she wishes, unless it is overuled by a 3/4 vote in the Magisterium.

That way it gives a small check and balance to this system but isn't invasive.
"Your uniform doesn't seem to fit. You're much too alive in it."

"You must be the change you want to see in the world" - Gandhi
"The worst prison would be a closed heart." - Pope John Paul II
Vekaiyu's Wiki Page | Ikrisia Levinile's Wiki Page | Listonia's Wiki Page
Online Profile Goto Top
 
Carondia
No Avatar
Call me Carondia
I would go for 2/3 vote, 3/4 is too much.
Citizen of The East Pacific
former Magister of The East Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Stateless
Member Avatar
Tandy 400
hmm...
I think that 3/4 is fine.
WhatWhatInTheButt
FORMER: Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Reminisci
Member Avatar
One of Us
3/4 to overrule seems fair.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Stateless
Member Avatar
Tandy 400
Is wa
Aug 17 2011, 04:56 PM
I meant it as the Magisterium maintaining a check on the Delegate if they find it absolutely necessary.

As Is was said, We need to maintain a check over the delegate, and well, lets face it, 3/4 is a decent amount to keep it as a 'check', and 3/4 is also a good way to show that we think it's "Absolutely Necessary"
WhatWhatInTheButt
FORMER: Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Carondia
No Avatar
Call me Carondia
Okay, this is how I think we have it ATM




11th Assembly, Bill MA-1

Citation
1. This Act may be cited as the Embassy Act.

Authority over Embassies
2. The Delegate, or the Delegate's appointed official, may approve, deny, or request Embassies as he/she chooses, unless it is overruled by a 3/4 vote in the Magisterium.
(1) The Delegate may overrule their appointed official's decision to approve, deny, or request Embassies as he/she chooses.

Passage
3. This Act shall be passed upon it's passage by the Magisterium and signature into law by the Delegate or upon it's passage by the Magisterium, veto by the Delegate, and the Magisterium overriding that veto with a 3/4 majority.
Citizen of The East Pacific
former Magister of The East Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Kelssek
Member Avatar
Hero of the Soviet Onion
I cannot agree with the idea of the legislative body interfering with executive decisions of the government. To me it looks really adversarial; if the Delegate decides they don't want embassies, that's their policy and it is well within what should be the Delegate's realm.

Also, in the amended proposal on the table, section 3 is completely redundant and should be omitted. It also doesn't take into account the gameplay consideration that in-game embassies are entirely controlled by the Delegate. With forum embassies, Admins can create them anyway but that's not the case with in-game embassies.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Reminisci
Member Avatar
One of Us
I'm inclined to agree with you, Kelssek. But I can't; at least not fully. While I'm a proponent of minimizing interference between each branch of government, I am also in favour of due checks and balances. And when it comes to foreign relations, as I've said before, I believe the Executive or, more specifically, the Delegate (or his or her appointee) ought to be chief. However, should the Delegate lose his or her marbles and grant an embassy or other form of relation to say a known, declared or suspected enemy of our Region, then we should reserve the right to counter such a move. I doubt it would happen, but you never know. That's why it should be a reserved power, difficult to enact so we don't abuse it. It's not really our place, but we can make it ours if we deem absolutely necessary. That's why I'm okay with 3/4 or unanimous vote to overrule the Executive action. As I said, I doubt we would ever have to use it, but it's there just in case.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Kelssek
Member Avatar
Hero of the Soviet Onion
The Delegate is elected to hold and exercise certain powers. The Magisterium is elected to hold and exercise certain different powers. The Delegate is not elected to pass laws, and the Magisters are not elected to set endorsement caps or negotiate embassies.

If it is felt the Delegate has made poor judgements in their policies, it is up to the citizens to consider that at the next Delegate election, and not for the Magisters, who are elected for a different purpose entirely, to start stomping on executive decisions we take offence to.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
SCKnightVulshain
Member Avatar
The Boll Weevel
Kelssek's made a good point here. I'm afraid we may have overstepped our political boundaries here, y'all.

There's nothing wrong with this. It was a good idea with good intentions, but that's what we Magisters are here for: to decide on how to make the TEP a better (and less headache inducing) place for everyone. If we have to vote against an act, there's no harm done. It means we are doing our job.
Confederacy of Vulshain
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Carondia
No Avatar
Call me Carondia
I motion that we amend Kelssek's original Act Proposal as follows: addition of Section 3.

Quote:
 
Authority to veto Embassies
4. The Magisterium may veto the Delegate, or the Delegate's appointed official's, decision to accept, deny, or request an Embassy by a three-fourths majority.

5. The Delegate may, when concerning over forum Embassies, overrule their appointer officer's decision to accept, deny, or request an Embassy.


In accordance with the Standing Orders of the Magisterium the author of the Act may either add it to the Act or a 48 hour vote is to be held by the Provost on the matter. As it is quite clear that Kelssek would not add (at least Section 4) to the Act I motion for this to go to a vote.

Motion to Vote
Citizen of The East Pacific
former Magister of The East Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
SCKnightVulshain
Member Avatar
The Boll Weevel
Very well, then. I second this motion.
Confederacy of Vulshain
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Carondia
No Avatar
Call me Carondia
((Vulshain, you're forgetting that your Provost))
Citizen of The East Pacific
former Magister of The East Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Reminisci
Member Avatar
One of Us
Very well. I'm going to keep my mouth shut and just vote when the four of you piece something together. I haven't the time for this. ;)
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
SCKnightVulshain
Member Avatar
The Boll Weevel
Sorry about that. I had a rough day.

With that out of the way, I hereby start the voting.

My Vote: Abstain
Confederacy of Vulshain
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Kelssek
Member Avatar
Hero of the Soviet Onion
I vote AGAINST the amendment.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Carondia
No Avatar
Call me Carondia
I vote For
Citizen of The East Pacific
former Magister of The East Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Stateless
Member Avatar
Tandy 400
Abstain
WhatWhatInTheButt
FORMER: Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Carondia
No Avatar
Call me Carondia
Motion is Withdrawn (the motion has been defeated).
Citizen of The East Pacific
former Magister of The East Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Kelssek
Member Avatar
Hero of the Soviet Onion
In which case, I move that we vote on the original version (in the second post of this thread).
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Carondia
No Avatar
Call me Carondia
Is wa
Aug 18 2011, 05:47 PM
4. The Delegate may, when concerning over forum Embassies, overrule their appointer officer's decision to accept, deny, or request an Embassy.

Can I still get you to maybe add this section Kelssek?
Citizen of The East Pacific
former Magister of The East Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
SCKnightVulshain
Member Avatar
The Boll Weevel
Kelssek
Aug 19 2011, 01:32 PM
In which case, I move that we vote on the original version (in the second post of this thread).

Quote:
 
Is wa's quote:
Is wa
Aug 18 2011, 05:47 PM
4. The Delegate may, when concerning over forum Embassies, overrule their appointer officer's decision to accept, deny, or request an Embassy.

Can I still get you to maybe add this section Kelssek?


I see no problem in adding Is Wa's Section 4 to the original Embassy Act, as in my opinion, Section 4 creates a safeguard against any possible dangers.

I second the motion to vote on the original Embassy Act with Section 4 included.
Confederacy of Vulshain
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Stateless
Member Avatar
Tandy 400
I vote FOR
WhatWhatInTheButt
FORMER: Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Carondia
No Avatar
Call me Carondia
I vote Aye ((Or Kelssek could just approve it and then we can get to voting on the actual resolution))
Citizen of The East Pacific
former Magister of The East Pacific
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Archive: Magisterium · Next Topic »
Locked Topic

Infinite is a customized version of Simple ZB created by Protego of Outline & Zetaboards Theme Zone
Icons by Paomedia and hosted by imgur


© The East Pacific 2003-2018