A Compromise Resident Rights Proposal

The Magisterium
1

I agree with EM that residents should be given rights and I do like RMB trials now that I have given the idea some thought.

However, I don’t like the complete overhaul that EM wants. I believe that it will be extremely difficult to implement and will have a large number of unintended side-effects by nature of being a complete overhaul.

The extreme difficulty of implementing this proposal is, in my opinion, enough for me to oppose it. If, however, EM’s proposal is widely supported then at the very least, it should implemented in stages slowly. I don’t like the idea of implementing these reforms in one go. Stages would allow us to carefully control the side-effects as they happen and to adjust the law as needed. However, this will take a long time.

Further, the current system works. Issues with the current system can be addressed independently of huge reforms.

I also believe we should wait for more ideas before implementing any proposal. With time, more people will get more ideas.

That said, I propose this alternative that won’t be as difficult to implement nor will it overhaul the current system.

It is a compromise so I understand if it satisfies no-one but this is the current limit of what I’m willing reform.

-Residents will be granted full rights to a trial (with a right to representation, not incriminate themselves, etc.). This will mean no more hearings. If the trial can’t happen on the forums then it should happen in-game. I know Fylkirvegr did this to ensure no-one has a reason to avoid trials and I’ll give you an outline of Fylk’s procedure below:

–A seperate region exists for gameside trials
–Motions are made via telegram to the region founder
–The region’s founder is controlled by the Chief Justice
–Motions and pre-trials are recorded in a dispatch along with the final verdict when it is made
—Here’s an example NationStates | Dispatch | Fylkirvegr Court of Justice Archive | Cases | [01-21] The Founder v. Scweinrelienen
–The actual trial with opening statements, cross examinations, closing statements, and rulings will happen on this regions RMB
–The region is passworded to protect trials from interruption

-Residents will also have their right to join the executive enshrined in the Conk.

-Residents who join the forum can propose laws to the Magisterium.

That is all. It isn’t a proposal that will significantly overhaul the regional laws nor cause as many side-effects. Maybe no-one will like this proposal but it’s the best compromise I can think of and I’d like it to be considered.

2

“Further, the current system works. Issues with the current system can be addressed independently of huge reforms.”

First of all, I feel like this statement fails to address its antithesis, which EM presents in detail:

— Begin quote from ____

Resident Rights?

It’s impossible. Let’s just get that out there. Residents don’t have rights. So what the solution? A Non-Voting Resident is a unregistered Citizen that may or may not have WA status. Wow. So easy.

— End quote

There is fierce opposition to mild reform, with a prime example of this being Pakitsk’s unwavering stance on resident rights. EM outright claims it’s impossible, and I have seen no mild proposal that has ever really been discussed in length. It seems like huge reforms are the only alternative to sticking with outdated tradition.

— Begin quote from ____

Big Data (IP checks) and Regional Security

Legitimately some people have concerns about IP checks. While I believe this is a minority. It can be a valid concern. We already verify by TG (maybe dispatch if Magisters commented on that other discussion but that would be part of this overhaul now) and that takes care of “are you the nation you say you are?”

So let’s eliminate the need to do an IP check as a standard operating procedure by WA Nation Only Voting for Delegate and Referendums. A Voting Resident is a registered voter that has a WA nation anywhere, NationStates. They must still have a puppet in TEP.

— End quote

Your proposal doesn’t even address the aspect of data concerns OR security concerns with the security system, yet still claims that the system works and that these issues can be fixed wi the mild reform.

Second of all, THIS ISN’T MILD REFORM. This is a radical pivot from our current judicial system, which has stood for years, to a new one based entirely on the judicial system of a small UCR.

All your propositions aside, I feel like you need to address ALL the issues with the current system before you claim this is a fix-all solution to our problems, and remove your claim that this is happening independently of huge reforms. It is a huge reform.

3

— Begin quote from ____

First of all, I feel like this statement fails to address its antithesis, which EM presents in detail:…]

— End quote

I was referring to the citizenship process here. EM’s antithesis is a belief and a solution to this belief.

— Begin quote from ____

There is fierce opposition to mild reform, with a prime example of this being Pakitsk’s unwavering stance on resident rights. EM outright claims it’s impossible, and I have seen no mild proposal that has ever really been discussed in length. It seems like huge reforms are the only alternative to sticking with outdated tradition.

— End quote

There is fierce opposition and perhaps this proposal is fruitless but this proposal is my alternative that I’d prefer over either extremes. At the very least, it gives people an idea of where I currently stand.

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

Big Data (IP checks) and Regional Security

Legitimately some people have concerns about IP checks. While I believe this is a minority. It can be a valid concern. We already verify by TG (maybe dispatch if Magisters commented on that other discussion but that would be part of this overhaul now) and that takes care of “are you the nation you say you are?”

So let’s eliminate the need to do an IP check as a standard operating procedure by WA Nation Only Voting for Delegate and Referendums. A Voting Resident is a registered voter that has a WA nation anywhere, NationStates. They must still have a puppet in TEP.

— End quote

Your proposal doesn’t even address the aspect of data concerns OR security concerns with the security system, yet still claims that the system works and that these issues can be fixed wi the mild reform.

— End quote

For privacy concerns, I’m not convinced. People might not trust this forum and I can understand that. For security concerns, I don’t remember encountering any in EM’s thread, I could have just forgotten reading them. Could you quote them here?

Why we jump the gun to giving everyone Citizenship immediately is strange, in my opinion, since we can grant more rights to residents gameside.

— Begin quote from ____

Second of all, THIS ISN’T MILD REFORM. This is a radical pivot from our current judicial system, which has stood for years, to a new one based entirely on the judicial system of a small UCR.

— End quote

I disagree. The two extremes are doing something to excess and doing something insufficiently. In this regard, this is moderate. I’m not asking for overhauls of the judicial system. I’m talking about RMB trials and gave the example of Fylk which does this. I outlined their procedure and want people to look at it and get an idea of how we could implement RMB trials.

— Begin quote from ____

All your propositions aside, I feel like you need to address ALL the issues with the current system before you claim this is a fix-all solution to our problems, and remove your claim that this is happening independently of huge reforms. It is a huge reform.

— End quote

I certainly never proposed this as a solution to all of our problems neither is this extreme. This proposal is my personal stance. You can list all the issues you see with the current system with the reasons behind them and, if I’m convinced, I’ll change my stance. I’m entirely open to changing my mind on this.

4

“Further, the current system works. Issues with the current system can be addressed independently of huge reforms.”

That is you proposing this as a solution to all our issues.

As for the security concerns, that’s part of the IP part. Where he says that IP checks aren’t necessary and proposes we switch to WA checks. Additionally, AMOM corroborated about how WA checks were a lot better than IP checks.

5

— Begin quote from ____

“Further, the current system works. Issues with the current system can be addressed independently of huge reforms.”

That is you proposing this as a solution to all our issues.

— End quote

I’m not proposing this as a solution to all problems. I believe you’re misinterpreting me. I’ll clarify for you. The current citizenship system works. If you have issues with it then they can be addressed independently of the massive reforms of EM.

— Begin quote from ____

As for the security concerns, that’s part of the IP part. Where he says that IP checks aren’t necessary and proposes we switch to WA checks. Additionally, AMOM corroborated about how WA checks were a lot better than IP checks.

— End quote

I don’t have much of an opinion on this yet but I’m open to hearing the reasoning and proposed system behind this.

6

— Begin quote from ____

— Begin quote from ____

“Further, the current system works. Issues with the current system can be addressed independently of huge reforms.”

That is you proposing this as a solution to all our issues.

— End quote

I’m not proposing this as a solution to all problems. I believe you’re misinterpreting me. I’ll clarify for you. The current citizenship system works. If you have issues with it then they can be addressed independently of the massive reforms of EM.

— Begin quote from ____

As for the security concerns, that’s part of the IP part. Where he says that IP checks aren’t necessary and proposes we switch to WA checks. Additionally, AMOM corroborated about how WA checks were a lot better than IP checks.

— End quote

I don’t have much of an opinion on this yet but I’m open to hearing the reasoning and proposed system behind this.

— End quote

So:

(1) This proposal is a response only to the issue of residents rights.

(2) Your thesis is based on the idea that the current citizenship system works.

(3) You have no opinion on the issues of “Big Data” to quote EM, or on regional security in regards to the vulnerability of IP checks and proposed improvement with WA checks instead.

(4) Your thesis is based on the idea that these issues should be resolved independently of any current proposals.

Am I correct?

7

— Begin quote from ____

(1) This proposal is a response only to the issue of residents rights.

— End quote

This proposal is a response only to the issue of residents rights so far. I’m not convinced that the citizenship process has to be overhauled.

— Begin quote from ____

(2) Your thesis is based on the idea that the current citizenship system works.

— End quote

My proposal is a response to resident rights. I am not yet convinced that the citizenship system needs massive reforms.

— Begin quote from ____

(3) You have no opinion on the issues of “Big Data” to quote EM, or on regional security in regards to the vulnerability of IP checks and proposed improvement with WA checks instead.

— End quote

If big data means privacy issues then no, I do have an opinion. I don’t believe that concern is valid for the reasons VW described in EM’s thread.

I don’t have an opinion on WA security checks vs IP security checks because I don’t know the reasoning behind it. If you could explain it then I can make a judgement.

— Begin quote from ____

(4) Your thesis is based on the idea that these issues should be resolved independently of any current proposals.

— End quote

My belief is that any issues someone has with the citizenship process should be dealt with independently of resident rights. This is because everyone might agree with the idea and it might get done. If it’s lumped with a more disagreeable proposal then it might not. With EM’s proposal, it isn’t possible to do resident rights and the citizenship process seperately since he wants to get rid of residents all together.

8

I motion this to vote

9

I second this motion.