[DRAFT] [REPEALS] Executive Services Act

The Magisterium
, ,
1

I’m taking material from Zuk’s and Lib’s threads / ideas and proposing my own, and would like to seek both of their approval (yes, I know this may take some conversation and convincing, so please comment) to take the helm here and complete the rewrite of the Executive Act; however, I want to take it even further: I will shave out even more verbosity, even more explicit requirements, and would like to consolidate the Executive, RO, and EPSA acts - AND PunJust, if it is passed (but I intend to push that forward first, as this will likely be a much longer and more difficult project). I am also proposing several functional / mechanical differences which require discussion. I am proposing the following:

  • a draft of the new “Executive Services Act”,
  • an amendment to the Delegate Elections Act (remove Elec.Comm. RO, make Vizier do TGs)
  • a repeal of the Executive Act,
  • a repeal of the Regional Officers Act,
  • a repeal of the EPSA Act,
  • and a repeal of my own Punishment Justification Act, if it is passed by the time this is voted on.

The Executive Services Act would be as follows:

DRAFT 1

SECTION I: CITATION

A. This act shall be known and cited as the “Executive Services Act”.

SECTION II: DEFINITIONS

A. As referenced in this Act, the Delegate is the current, legitimate, elected Delegate of The East Pacific.

B. As referenced in this Act, the Delegate Pro Tempore is any Vizier or previously-elected Delegate who is legally occupying the position of in-game World Assembly Delegate of The East Pacific.

C. As referenced in this Act, a Regional Officer or RO is the World Assembly Delegate-appointed position of the same name in-game.

D. As referenced in this Act, a Border Control Officer is an RO who has been given the in-game power of Border Control.

E. As referenced in this Act, a Designated Vizier is a Vizier chosen by the Praesidium to serve as a Border Control Officer.

F. As referenced in this Act, title refers to the in-game name assigned by the Delegate to a Regional Officer position.

SECTION III: THE CABINET

A. This Act grants the Delegate the liberty and authority to lead, to create and name, to organize, and to staff with Citizens of The East Pacific various Executive Offices / Ministries, within the limitations of this Act, the whole body of the law, and the Concordat. The whole of these Offices shall be known as the Cabinet.

B. The Cabinet may assist the Delegate in Executive functions such as but not explicitly limited to extending, approving, or denying embassy requests, World Assembly representation, interregional (foreign) affairs, internal / cultural affairs, and educational efforts.

C. The Delegate shall establish a minimum of one Cabinet Office or Ministry to manage any of, all of, or more than the aforementioned aspects of the Executive.

SECTION IV: EASTERN PACIFIC SOVEREIGN ARMY

A. This Act establishes the Eastern Pacific Sovereign Army, or EPSA, as the sole legitimate military of The East Pacific.

B. The Delegate shall be the highest-ranking member and Commander of the EPSA. The Delegate may appoint a Registered Voter to be the Overseeing Officer, or OO, of the EPSA, who may run the military on the Delegate’s behalf. The command structure of the EPSA may be further staffed by Registered Voters, with the lowest rank being available to Citizens of The East Pacific. The Delegate may dismiss members and reorganize the EPSA at will.

C. The Delegate or designated authority shall establish an official emblem for the EPSA, which may be used in communiqués, displayed by EPSA member nations during missions, and used to replace regional flags during EPSA-led occupations.

D. No member of the EPSA will actively participate in foreign military missions while participating in the EPSA.

E. The EPSA may execute defensive, offensive, or training activities outside of The East Pacific; however, the EPSA is forbidden from “griefing” regions: that is, committing acts intended to destroy a region and/or its community via ejecting or banning native nations, passwording the region, and / or refounding the region; this prohibition is waived in instances where the region systemically promotes, supports, or tolerates Nazi, fascist, or related ideologies, where the region has a known history of griefing other regions, where the region is at war with The East Pacific or a treaty ally of The East Pacific, where the region’s leadership has been punished for committing a summary, indictable, or constitutional offense against The East Pacific, where the region is a Warzone without relations with The East Pacific, or regions being liberated from foreign occupation.

SECTION V: REGIONAL OFFICERS

A. The Delegate shall have, by nature, and shall be able to exercise, within all confines of this Act, the whole body of the law, and the Concordat, all Regional Officer powers granted to them by the role of in-game World Assembly Delegate, and shall be made a Regional Officer with all of these powers by the Delegate Pro Tempore if they do not yet occupy the position in-game.

B. The Delegate may appoint any Citizen as an RO with any of the associated in-game powers besides Border Control, as suits the design of the Cabinet. The Praesidium shall select five Designated Viziers who must be given the in-game title of “Vizier” and the in-game RO powers of Communications and Border Control by the Delegate. The Administration (Concordat; Article G) may appoint four Citizens as Border Control Officers who must be given the in-game title of “RMB Moderator” by the Delegate to help enforce standards of conduct within the region. The Delegate may incorporate any of the Designated Viziers and/or RMB Moderators into the Cabinet and give them additional RO abilities, within any limitations of the law and Concordat.

C. The Magisterium or the Conclave may prohibit any individual from becoming a Cabinet RO or Designated Vizier for the remainder of the current Delegate’s term or may dismiss a Cabinet RO or Designated Vizier by 2/3 majority vote and prohibit the Delegate or the Viziers from reappointing them for the remainder of the Delegate’s term. The Magisterium may choose to reverse its decision by 2/3 majority vote. Prohibition or dismissal by either body may be appealed to the Conclave.

DRAFT 2

SECTION I: CITATION

…1.1. This act shall be known and cited as the “Executive Services Act”.

SECTION II: DEFINITIONS

…2.1. As referenced in this Act, the Delegate is the current, legitimate, elected Delegate of The East Pacific.

…2.2. As referenced in this Act, the Delegate Pro Tempore is any Vizier or previously-elected Delegate who is legally occupying the position of in-game World Assembly Delegate of The East Pacific.

…2.3. As referenced in this Act, a Regional Officer or RO is the World Assembly Delegate-appointed position of the same name in-game.

…2.4. As referenced in this Act, a Border Control Officer is an RO who has been given the in-game power of Border Control.

…2.5. As referenced in this Act, a Designated Vizier is a Vizier chosen by the Praesidium to serve as a Border Control Officer.

…2.6. As referenced in this Act, title refers to the in-game name assigned by the Delegate to a Regional Officer position.

SECTION III: THE CABINET

…3.1. This Act grants the Delegate the liberty and authority to lead, to create and name, to organize, and to staff with Citizens of The East Pacific various Executive Ministries, within the limitations of this Act, the whole body of the law, and the Concordat. The whole of the Chiefs of these Ministries shall be known as the Cabinet.

…3.2. The Cabinet and the Ministries may assist the Delegate in Executive functions including but not limited to extending, approving, or denying embassy requests, World Assembly representation, interregional (foreign) affairs, internal / cultural affairs, and education.

…3.3. The Delegate shall make known the entire structure and membership of the Cabinet and Ministries in a thread on The East Pacific’s official forum that is visible to all Citizens.

SECTION IV: EASTERN PACIFIC SOVEREIGN ARMY

…4.1. This Act establishes the Eastern Pacific Sovereign Army, or EPSA, as the sole legitimate military of The East Pacific.

…4.2. The Delegate shall be the highest-ranking member and Commander of the EPSA. The Delegate may appoint a Citizen to be the Overseeing Officer, or OO, of the EPSA, who may run the military on the Delegate’s behalf. EPSA membership shall only be available to Citizens of The East Pacific. The Delegate may dismiss members and reorganize the EPSA at will.

…4.3. The Delegate or designated authority shall establish an official emblem for the EPSA, which may be used in communications, displayed by EPSA member nations during missions, and used to replace regional flags during EPSA-led occupations.

…4.4. No member of the EPSA will actively participate in foreign military missions.

…4.5. The EPSA may execute defensive, offensive, or training activities outside of The East Pacific; however, the EPSA is forbidden from “griefing” regions: that is, committing acts intended to destroy a region and/or its community via ejecting or banning native nations, passwording the region, and / or refounding the region; this prohibition is waived in instances where the region systemically promotes, supports, or tolerates Nazi, fascist, or hateful ideologies, where the region has a known history of griefing other regions, where the region is at war with The East Pacific or a treaty ally of The East Pacific, where the region is a Warzone without relations with The East Pacific, or regions being liberated from foreign occupation.

SECTION V: REGIONAL OFFICERS

…5.1. The Delegate shall have, by nature, and shall be able to exercise, within all confines of this Act, the whole body of the law, and the Concordat, all Regional Officer powers granted to them by the role of in-game World Assembly Delegate, and shall be made a Regional Officer with all of these powers by the Delegate Pro Tempore if they do not yet occupy the position in-game.

…5.2. The Delegate may appoint any Citizen as an RO with any of the associated in-game powers besides Border Control. The Praesidium shall select four Designated Viziers who must be given the in-game title of “Vizier” and the in-game RO powers of Communications and Border Control by the Delegate. The Administration (Concordat; Article G) may appoint four Citizens as Border Control Officers who must be given the in-game title of “RMB Moderator” by the Delegate to help enforce standards of conduct within the region. The Delegate may incorporate any of the Designated Viziers and/or RMB Moderators into the Cabinet and give them additional RO abilities, within any limitations of the law and Concordat. RMB Moderators may serve concurrently as Designated Viziers.

…5.3. The Magisterium may prohibit any individual from becoming a Cabinet RO or Designated Vizier for the remainder of the current Delegate’s term or may dismiss a Cabinet RO or Designated Vizier by 2/3 majority vote and prohibit the Delegate or the Viziers from reappointing them for the remainder of the Delegate’s term. The Magisterium may choose to reverse its decision by 2/3 majority vote. The Conclave may dismiss an RO from their position as part of any trial verdict. Prohibition or dismissal by either body may be appealed to the Conclave.

DRAFT 1 BULLET POINTS

Key differences:

  • At minimum, one Ministry (Cabinet) MUST be established, but its design is now entirely up to the Delegate.
  • MoFA is no longer obligatory. MoRA is no longer obligatory. UTEP is no longer obligatory. Nothing prevents a Delegate from continuing these on precedent, but nothing prevents a Delegate from disbanding them.
  • EPSA is to be staffed and led by Registered Voters, but membership is open to Citizens.
  • The delegate MAY, not SHALL, appoint an OO; EPSA organization is less rigidly outlined.
  • Removed EPSA pledge requirement. Delegate can design application process.
  • No more “make up your own names” for EPSA for the top 2 ranks. AFAIK nobody has used that in years.
  • EPSA membership is no longer available to participants in foreign militaries.
  • I can’t envision any acceptable instance where TEP’s soldiers should be allowed to oppose TEP’s military instances. I’ve removed this.
  • EPSA emblem use is optional, as Lib had intended: this has potential tactical relevance.
  • Removed the Citizenship waiver; it verges on unconstitutional. EPSA members should be trained to use puppets and not to remove their nations from TEP. This is bad practice.
  • The selection of 4 RMB mods is a good idea but the Delegate handing out Border Control under this preface opens us up to being usurped by a future rogue Delegate who chooses a cast of their own goons to “moderate the RMB” and undermine everything. It seems we can run with the standard and the individuals Altys has selected but make it up to the Administration, who can retain the current roster through Delegate transitions and replace it with real RMBers if any of the current mods choose to resign.
  • The Delegate can no longer give Border Control to any Cabinet members.
  • Dedicated Viziers increased to five: WE NEED TO BUILD A GREAT WALL. A GREAT, GREAT WALL. A BIG, BEAUTIFUL WALL. AND WE’RE GONNA MAKE OSIRIS PAY FOR IT.
  • Election Commissioner has been removed from ROs. Viziers will handle election TGs by order of the Viceroy.
  • This leaves the Delegate with 3 slots to work with for their Cabinet.

DRAFT 2 BULLET POINTS:

  • Formatting altered. Sorry, Bach.
  • “Offices” removed.
  • “Chiefs of these Ministries” = “Cabinet”.
  • “The Cabinet and the Ministries may assist…”
  • Changed “such as but not explicitly limited to” to “including but not limited to”.
  • Changed “educational efforts” to “education”.
  • Removed “The Delegate shall establish a minimum of one Cabinet Office or Ministry to manage any of, all of, or more than the aforementioned aspects of the Executive.”
  • Added “The Delegate shall make known the entire structure and membership of the Cabinet and Ministries in a thread on The East Pacific’s official forum that is visible to all Citizens.”
  • Changed “Delegate may appoint a Citizen to be the … OO”
  • Changed “The command structure of the EPSA may be further staffed by Registered Voters, with the lowest rank being available to Citizens of The East Pacific.” to “EPSA membership shall only be available to Citizens of The East Pacific.”
  • ELIMINATED THE FRENCH
  • Changed “No member of the EPSA will actively participate in foreign military missions while participating in the EPSA.” to “No member of the EPSA will actively participate in foreign military missions.”
  • Deleted “where the region’s leadership has been punished for committing a summary, indictable, or constitutional offense against The East Pacific” from griefing waiver.
  • Modified “related ideologies” to “hateful ideologies”
  • Removed “as suits the design of the Cabinet”.
  • Changed “five” back to “four” DVs.
  • Added “RMB Moderators may serve concurrently as Designated Viziers.”
  • Changed The Magisterium or the Conclave may prohibit any individual from becoming a Cabinet RO or Designated Vizier for the remainder of the current Delegate's term or may dismiss a Cabinet RO or Designated Vizier by 2/3 majority vote and prohibit the Delegate or the Viziers from reappointing them for the remainder of the Delegate's term. The Magisterium may choose to reverse its decision by 2/3 majority vote. Prohibition or dismissal by either body may be appealed to the Conclave. to The Magisterium may prohibit any individual from becoming a Cabinet RO or Designated Vizier for the remainder of the current Delegate's term or may dismiss a Cabinet RO or Designated Vizier by 2/3 majority vote and prohibit the Delegate or the Viziers from reappointing them for the remainder of the Delegate's term. The Magisterium may choose to reverse its decision by 2/3 majority vote. The Conclave may dismiss an RO from their position as part of any trial verdict. Prohibition or dismissal by either body may be appealed to the Conclave.

SUMMARY, FROM DRAFT 1:

I had considered melding this with the RMBRA even but decided that was too far and too much. That act too, however, needs work, which I’ve begun.

This is a monumental task and there’s a chance I’ve missed things. Please review carefully. I will double- and triple-check.

I need to add a SECTION VI which defines any necessary punishments.

There are a few things in here that I’m not 100% satisfied with and I will be working on those.

I’m currently working on the DelElec amendment to remove the Commissioner RO and will add it to this post shortly.

2

I don’t think UTEP’s mention in this law should be completely discarded. Whether it goes through more or less active times, it should always remain open for anyone to contribute, and that’s why it was codified into this law back in the day. That said, I am looking forward into any proposals to make its structure more flexible.

3

My goal is to make UTEP’s existence and organization up to the Delegate. I suspect most ministries will stick around simply on precedent, including UTEP; however, I’d like to give the Delegate more freedom to work with the Administration to reorg / reshuffle UTEP’s forum structure, as well as make things like how a Delegate chooses to handle UTEP or certain ministries an option for less "copy/paste"y campaign platforms and give us more interesting elections. Delegate refuses to perpetuate UTEP? Don’t vote for them. Even if the Delegate essentially decided to “do away with” UTEP, EM / the Admins wouldn’t just delete the forum and all the associated UTEP materials forever.

4

If you’d liek to make the law readable i heavily suggest using subclauses instead of keeping the law in massively big chunks. As is, parts of this law are more unreadable than what we currently have. Removing verbosity is great, but if you shove everything into massive paragraphs it doesn’t really matter how much verbosity you remove.

Also, for the sake of continuity I’d prefer you use numbers instead of letters. But in any case, here’s a suggested rewrite without changing anything conceptually:

My thoughts:

  • Please use numbers
  • I dislike merging multiple topical acts into one but I can see I’m just being overruled in that regard so
  • I think the structuring of the Executive is a bit weird in this Act. The Cabinet has never been Ministries (which are institutions) but rather filled with Ministers. I think it’d make more sense to delete the last sentence of 3.A. and just establish the Cabinet as the direct organ of leadership of the government and allow the Delegate to appoint anyone to it - as the current Executive Act does. I also think the mandate of having one Ministry is a bit arbitrary and unnecessary.
  • While I understand prohibiting non-Reg Voters from serving in EPSA, I’m not sure there’s any real solution from prohibiting non-Cits from holding no rank beyond… prohibiting from serving in EPSA entirely. But in that case, that’ll harm our piler capacities. Fact is, a Delegate can always just give someone a certain rank but then just allow them to commander-level things regardless.
  • I completely disagree with disallowing an EPSA soldier from serving in foreign militaries. There isn’t any real reason not to allow it - if EPSA isn’t doing anything, why should we prevent someone from serving in another military and doing ops with them? If this is about intelligence leaking, people can just lie about being in another military if they really want to sneak EPSA secrets, so it’s a bit of a moot point IMO 'cuz if they’re found out they’re getting charged with treason espionage as our toughest crime act for such an offense either way. So long as this prohibition remains in this draft, I will be against this draft.
  • I also completely disagree with using the fact that someone’s leader committed a crime here as an excuse to justify griefing another region. Just because such a region selected someone as their leader shouldn’t merit us helping in their destruction - I really don’t care if said individual harmed us, that doesn’t justify us burning their region to the ground in any way. A griefing exemption in such a case should only be allowed if we have an issue with the region as a whole, not just one leader who more likely than not is temporary - which is already covered by the war exemption in this clause. I will be against this Act so long as this remains in it.
  • We should probably keep a mandate somewhere ensuring the Delegate Pro Tempore must follow Delegate instructions in using the Delegacy’s RO powers, assuming a Delegate exists.
5

If you’d liek to make the law readable i heavily suggest using subclauses instead of keeping the law in massively big chunks. As is, parts of this law are more unreadable than what we currently have. Removing verbosity is great, but if you shove everything into massive paragraphs it doesn’t really matter how much verbosity you remove.

Also, for the sake of continuity I’d prefer you use numbers instead of letters. But in any case, here’s a suggested rewrite without changing anything conceptually:

I’m not married to the format. Your version looks better. I’d still like to run a poll to see what numbering structure people prefer, overall.

  • I dislike merging multiple topical acts into one but I can see I’m just being overruled in that regard so

I’m not even going to say how many hours I’ve spent within the last 2 weeks reading, re-reading, then re-re-reading TEP’s Concordat and current body of law, and still walking away with no memory of certain aspects of them. All I’ll say was that it was an unacceptable number of hours, and I haven’t even gotten to the current SOs. Acts must be consolidated, the spiderweb of branch interactions must be simplified, and functionless words must be deleted.

  • I think the structuring of the Executive is a bit weird in this Act. The Cabinet has never been Ministries (which are institutions) but rather filled with Ministers. I think it’d make more sense to delete the last sentence of 3.A. and just establish the Cabinet as the direct organ of leadership of the government and allow the Delegate to appoint anyone to it - as the current Executive Act does. I also think the mandate of having one Ministry is a bit arbitrary and unnecessary.

I can rework it such that the “Cabinet” is literally the heads of any ministries. I also don’t have strong opinions on that mandate & can minimize further.

  • While I understand prohibiting non-Reg Voters from serving in EPSA, I’m not sure there’s any real solution from prohibiting non-Cits from holding no rank beyond… prohibiting from serving in EPSA entirely. But in that case, that’ll harm our piler capacities. Fact is, a Delegate can always just give someone a certain rank but then just allow them to commander-level things regardless.

Fine. Changing.

  • I completely disagree with disallowing an EPSA soldier from serving in foreign militaries. There isn’t any real reason not to allow it - if EPSA isn’t doing anything, why should we prevent someone from serving in another military and doing ops with them? If this is about intelligence leaking, people can just lie about being in another military if they really want to sneak EPSA secrets, so it’s a bit of a moot point IMO 'cuz if they’re found out they’re getting charged with treason espionage as our toughest crime act for such an offense either way. So long as this prohibition remains in this draft, I will be against this draft.

Even the current act says that “the Delegate or the Overseeing Officer reserves the right to remove the rank from [a] nation . . . currently serving simultaneously and actively in another military organization”.

I literally cannot find the original act thanks to our forum situations, but I remember my own intentions: TEP was in the middle of a mess of R/D push-and-pull politics and subject to vote importation and WA member poaching by Unibot, who was attempting to pull the region first in an unofficial capacity and later in an official one into the UDL’s sphere of influence. Without an act prohibiting this and a military recruitment drive of our own, he would have succeeded. The EPSA Act helped to stymie Unibot’s agenda in TEP and made it otherwise more difficult for foreign militaries to influence TEP directly, instead establishing the first native militia that ever existed in the region. I recruited Twobagger from 10KI to be the first OO and helped build EPSA into a force of roughly 15 updaters (who were not participating in foreign militaries) and more pilers, which later worked alongside Karpathos (in charge of the NPO’s army - PEF, I believe) to raid NAZI EUROPE - an operation which failed due to Karp’s collaboration with raiders, who wanted to wrestle control of the operation away from him during prime time and accidentally tipped off defenders to the raid (point assignment fell apart and defenders rushed into NAZI EUROPE to prevent us from capturing it). Unrelated, but this (and my Senate membership) was the origin of our NPO alliance.

While times have changed and TEP has since worked more effectively with specific foreign militaries here and there, it remains that inflated egos and predatory agendas plague many of these organizations and that TEP is a prize well worth capturing. There are certain prominent raider orgs in particular that I cannot trust and which could easily use the EPSA Act in its current state to import voters into TEP who could subsequently be exempt from our WA requirements and who could disappear their WA into foreign ops while stacking our referenda and Magisterium. They could further use this mechanism to achieve multiple votes. I disagree with your disagreement and assert that there is actually a very good reason to establish (reestablish?) this requirement.

I have long maintained that our region does not, in fact, need to be sustained by cosmopolitanism (and may, in fact, ultimately be destroyed by it - directly or indirectly), and while I appreciate the contributions of recent officials who commit to this playstyle I cite my own staunchly “regionalist” administrations of 2012 - 2013 as examples of this ideal contributing to an explosion of internal activity in TEP in which a sizeable chunk of today’s “old guard” broke out into TEP’s politics. I cite my own internal recruitment of the largest Magisterium in TEP history, and I cite the early days of the EPSA, when it was strictly a native force and members didn’t shuffle off into realms beyond our supervision and jurisdiction when the army wasn’t “doing anything”.

We have plenty to gain from collaboration with / inclusion of foreign politicians and entities. But we need to draw lines for the sake of our own security and survival. Martyring itself to the ideal of unconditional “inclusion” has burned TEP more than once.

I have felt and will always feel very strongly on this subject. I intend to bring it to vote, either in this format or in an amendment to the EPSA Act, and will only reconsider if it fails.

  • I also completely disagree with using the fact that someone’s leader committed a crime here as an excuse to justify griefing another region. Just because such a region selected someone as their leader shouldn’t merit us helping in their destruction - I really don’t care if said individual harmed us, that doesn’t justify us burning their region to the ground in any way. A griefing exemption in such a case should only be allowed if we have an issue with the region as a whole, not just one leader who more likely than not is temporary - which is already covered by the war exemption in this clause. I will be against this Act so long as this remains in it.

I was thinking back to the Slatos raid on this one but I don’t feel very strongly towards it either, and there are instances where it could be used / abused in ways that might achieve very negative outcomes. Seeing what others think but I’ll probably change this one.

  • We should probably keep a mandate somewhere ensuring the Delegate Pro Tempore must follow Delegate instructions in using the Delegacy’s RO powers, assuming a Delegate exists.

We might want to work this one into the Conk.

6

Also just throwing in here as an aside on my “inclusion” rant that “cosmopolitan” vs. “regionalist” was terminology invented by Unibot himself, and he’d always skew the former positive and the latter as reactionary in his subsequent essays / general interactions. But it was all in service of his infinite agenda to subvert regional governments and recruit from around the world as many WA nations as possible for his defender military + WA authorship machine - regional security and stability be damned, even if they were democratic GCRs that ought to be defended.

7

1… What is the difference between the Delegate Pro Tempore here and the Acting Delegate in literally every other text? Both seem to be the same thing, and a different/more complicated name is meh, especially when both are used at the same time.

2… Idk if it’s necessary to define Regional Officer but that’s pretty nitpicky of me.

3… Idk why “Offices / Ministries”. Just do Ministries IMO. Unless you wanna just do Office. There’s something charming about “Office / Officer” instead of “Ministry / Minister”. But that’s a big stylistic change for another time methinks.

4… IIIA seems to say that all the Ministries form the Cabinet. So the entire Executive = the Cabinet. I don’t think this is intended. Perhaps change it to say “The appointed heads of these Ministries shall be known as Ministers, and the collective heads shall be known as the Cabinet.” If “Cabinet” is just a synonym for “Executive”, then there’s no need for having “Cabinet” at all. Plus, there’s no expectation of privacy within actual-Cabinet because law-Cabinet is just the entire Executive, so it may be a dicey legal area with treason-espionage, I think. The risk is probably very small, but idk. Just seems wrong.

5… I hate the word “efforts”. I stg I’ll vote against if you don’t replace it with “affairs”.

6… Nitpicking with Aiv nit is: “such as but not explicitly limited to” → “including but not limited to”. Why make it a little bit more confusing and longer and more complicated (rendered null by point 7)

7… “B. The Cabinet may assist the Delegate in Executive functions such as but not explicitly limited to extending, approving, or denying embassy requests, World Assembly representation, interregional (foreign) affairs, internal / cultural affairs, and educational efforts.

C. The Delegate shall establish a minimum of one Cabinet Office or Ministry to manage any of, all of, or more than the aforementioned aspects of the Executive.”

I don’t like this. Idk why, but it just sounds dumb to me. Hear me out:

“B. The duties of the Executive shall be to approve/deny embassy requests, represent the interests of the region in the World Assembly, oversee foreign and domestic affairs, including but not limited to culture, news media, and education.

C. The Ministries may be assigned any number of duties assigned to the Executive.

D. The Delegate shall establish a minimum of one Ministry.”

8… “Commander of the EPSA”? Not Commander-in-Chief? Ig Commander works, but less cool, and kinda breaks from tradition. If you’re doing that, maybe fit it into the “Overseeing Officer” terminology by making it “Commanding Officer” or “Chief Commanding Officer”, although the latter sounds quite corporate.

9… “run the military” sounds too informal. Maybe “lead the military”.

10… “The command structure of the EPSA may be further staffed by Registered Voters, with the lowest rank being available to Citizens of The East Pacific”. I get this, but also I kinda don’t. Why do we need to specify this? First part’s fine, but we could then say “Lower ranks may be held by Citizens of The East Pacific regardless of voter registration status.” if we wanna get this done. Why specifically say “lowest rank”? Is this so that the Del/OO can make some upper enlisted ranks voter reg as well? If so, why not say “Requirements for lower ranks may be determined by the Delegate or Overseeing Officer.”? Or “Additional requirements for officers and lower ranks may be determined by the Delegate or Overseeing Officer.”? Idk, this just sounded weird to me.

11… “communiqués”?? Really? Why. Just…just do “communications”. Please. No French. Please.

12… “actively participate in foreign military missions while participating in the EPSA” probably means “actively participate in foreign military missions while serving as a member of the EPSA”. Current wording just suggests they can’t do two ops with two militaries at once, which no one is doing. This wording is far clearer.

13… “Nazi, fascist, or related ideologies”…are gonna add more to this or will we leave it at that? “Related ideologies” could be interpreted to be “similarly hateful ideologies” but we could also say “sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, or related ideologies” as well. Or just “hateful ideologies” or smth. Or “ideologies condemned by the Administration, as defined by Article G” or smth. Idk. We need to nail down this thing.

14… “and shall be made a Regional Officer with all of these powers by the Delegate Pro Tempore if they do not yet occupy the position in-game.” Maybe add “, unless they are removed from their position by the Conclave or Praesidium for high crimes” or smth? Not technically necessary, probably, because they wouldn’t be the Delegate anymore by law, but idk. Maybe

15… Maybe add to VB that “Designated Viziers may concurrently serve as RMB Moderators.” just as a point of clarification.

16… Idk about 5 desviz. 4 is enough I think. I think if we have 4 IC security, 4 OOC security, and 4 Executive designated slots, that’s a fair balance. In my opinion, that’s the best option. Remember, the Executive still needs some flexibility, MoC, MoI, MoFA, and MoWA traditionally need RO, and some others as well. I mean, you can always funnel requests through someone else, but when my administration did that, literally no one used it. It adds an extra barrier between the Ministers and their duties, IMO.

17… For the record I fully and completely support the RMB Moderators being chosen by Admin. That’s where we’re going with the RGT, and I think it’s about time our law reflected it. It’s an OOC position, no need to involve IC politics.

18… Idk if I’m comfortable with giving the Courts the power to randomly remove Designated Viziers from the RO slot, or even Ministers for that matter, for literally no reason. It’s something maybe the Magisterium should do, but even then only for Ministers. If Conclave can do it “for high crimes” then yeah absolutely. That’s good and fine. As is……nah don’t think so.

8

Same. I’m not the biggest fan of it, but then again I suppose I could just write a resolution about it instead. But relegating all Magisterium regulation of government to nonbinding resolutions is not all hunky dory IMO. There should still be SOME laws about Executive structure and organization IMO. If TSP can function with structure in its Constitution, we can function with structure in our statutes. So I guess I’ll allow it but not happily, and I may try to bring back some parts later. Just don’t want it to distract from the core of this proposal, really.

9

But then we get campaigns where half of it is “I will keep X exactly the way it is” for months and months and months of elections, and we begin to wonder if maybe we’ve given too much flexibility. And it looks boring and seems lame.

10

I agree with all of this, but I haven’t read AMOM’s reply yet one sec.

11

Oh one more thing: there is nothing about the Viceroy ordering Viziers to send tgs.

12

1… What is the difference between the Delegate Pro Tempore here and the Acting Delegate in literally every other text? Both seem to be the same thing, and a different/more complicated name is meh, especially when both are used at the same time.

The position of “Acting Delegate” in the Conk only exists when the actual Delegate is “suspended or leave[s] office by removal, resignation, or any other means” (presumably WA ejection or deletion or something), implying that the Delegate has outright vacated the office and isn’t just tarting his way back up into it after accidentally dropping WA, or tarting into it after winning the election. I used this unfortunate deviation to avoid invoking a position from the Constitution in a way that doesn’t match its intentions.

2… Idk if it’s necessary to define Regional Officer but that’s pretty nitpicky of me.

Came from the original Act. Despite the anti-verbosity crusade I still prefer including definitions like this one, even if “everyone knows what it is” - just in case.

3… Idk why “Offices / Ministries”. Just do Ministries IMO. Unless you wanna just do Office. There’s something charming about “Office / Officer” instead of “Ministry / Minister”. But that’s a big stylistic change for another time methinks.

Can cut out Offices.

4… IIIA seems to say that all the Ministries form the Cabinet. So the entire Executive = the Cabinet. I don’t think this is intended. Perhaps change it to say “The appointed heads of these Ministries shall be known as Ministers, and the collective heads shall be known as the Cabinet.” If “Cabinet” is just a synonym for “Executive”, then there’s no need for having “Cabinet” at all. Plus, there’s no expectation of privacy within actual-Cabinet because law-Cabinet is just the entire Executive, so it may be a dicey legal area with treason-espionage, I think. The risk is probably very small, but idk. Just seems wrong.

See Zuk reply.

5… I hate the word “efforts”. I stg I’ll vote against if you don’t replace it with “affairs”.

Will change to “education” instead, just to only partially accommodate you

6… Nitpicking with Aiv nit is: “such as but not explicitly limited to” → “including but not limited to”. Why make it a little bit more confusing and longer and more complicated (rendered null by point 7)

k

“B. The duties of the Executive shall be to approve/deny embassy requests, represent the interests of the region in the World Assembly, oversee foreign and domestic affairs, including but not limited to culture, news media, and education.

C. The Ministries may be assigned any number of duties assigned to the Executive.

D. The Delegate shall establish a minimum of one Ministry.”

Yeah, it’s better.

8… “Commander of the EPSA”? Not Commander-in-Chief? Ig Commander works, but less cool, and kinda breaks from tradition. If you’re doing that, maybe fit it into the “Overseeing Officer” terminology by making it “Commanding Officer” or “Chief Commanding Officer”, although the latter sounds quite corporate.

I don’t need any more corporate officers in my life. Can change to Commander-in-Chief.

9… “run the military” sounds too informal. Maybe “lead the military”.

Yes

10… “The command structure of the EPSA may be further staffed by Registered Voters, with the lowest rank being available to Citizens of The East Pacific”. I get this, but also I kinda don’t. Why do we need to specify this? First part’s fine, but we could then say “Lower ranks may be held by Citizens of The East Pacific regardless of voter registration status.” if we wanna get this done. Why specifically say “lowest rank”? Is this so that the Del/OO can make some upper enlisted ranks voter reg as well? If so, why not say “Requirements for lower ranks may be determined by the Delegate or Overseeing Officer.”? Or “Additional requirements for officers and lower ranks may be determined by the Delegate or Overseeing Officer.”? Idk, this just sounded weird to me.

See Zuk reply. Doing away with this.

11… “communiqués”?? Really? Why. Just…just do “communications”. Please. No French. Please.

Baguette

12… “actively participate in foreign military missions while participating in the EPSA” probably means “actively participate in foreign military missions while serving as a member of the EPSA”. Current wording just suggests they can’t do two ops with two militaries at once, which no one is doing. This wording is far clearer.

Yes, better

13… “Nazi, fascist, or related ideologies”…are gonna add more to this or will we leave it at that? “Related ideologies” could be interpreted to be “similarly hateful ideologies” but we could also say “sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, or related ideologies” as well. Or just “hateful ideologies” or smth. Or “ideologies condemned by the Administration, as defined by Article G” or smth. Idk. We need to nail down this thing.

It’s hard to nail down by nature. Can probably do “hateful ideologies”. I hesitate to invoke the Administration in this one.

14… “and shall be made a Regional Officer with all of these powers by the Delegate Pro Tempore if they do not yet occupy the position in-game.” Maybe add “, unless they are removed from their position by the Conclave or Praesidium for high crimes” or smth? Not technically necessary, probably, because they wouldn’t be the Delegate anymore by law, but idk. Maybe

I don’t think it’s necessary. Because yes, then they’d no longer be “Delegate”.

15… Maybe add to VB that “Designated Viziers may concurrently serve as RMB Moderators.” just as a point of clarification.

Well, that’s actually interesting to think about: what if an RMB mod does give a shit about the government to the extent that they’re elevated to Vizier someday, and chosen to also be a DV? Not the current scenario, so I can add your suggestion, but it might be something to change later.

16… Idk about 5 desviz. 4 is enough I think. I think if we have 4 IC security, 4 OOC security, and 4 Executive designated slots, that’s a fair balance. In my opinion, that’s the best option. Remember, the Executive still needs some flexibility, MoC, MoI, MoFA, and MoWA traditionally need RO, and some others as well. I mean, you can always funnel requests through someone else, but when my administration did that, literally no one used it. It adds an extra barrier between the Ministers and their duties, IMO.

Alright.

18… Idk if I’m comfortable with giving the Courts the power to randomly remove Designated Viziers from the RO slot, or even Ministers for that matter, for literally no reason. It’s something maybe the Magisterium should do, but even then only for Ministers. If Conclave can do it “for high crimes” then yeah absolutely. That’s good and fine. As is……nah don’t think so.

I actually agree with this and think the Conclave’s powers are terrifyingly overweight. I’m happy to change it such that they can only remove them as the result of an indictment. I’d like a few more people to weigh in on this one.

But then we get campaigns where half of it is “I will keep X exactly the way it is” for months and months and months of elections, and we begin to wonder if maybe we’ve given too much flexibility. And it looks boring and seems lame.

My immediate goal at the very least is to allow Altys+EM maximum freedom to minimize the forum structure and paring off legislation that requires or even implies that it needs to exist in a particular way should help. Also, my campaign would be to just rip it down to 1 forum and let anyone post in it without any sort of Chancellor / leadership structure. :clown_face:

Oh one more thing: there is nothing about the Viceroy ordering Viziers to send tgs.

I need to amend the Delegate Elections Act for this one. That’s going to have to happen in tandem with this amendment. I’d push this one through first to make sure it actually passes and have the second one (DelElec) ready to move to vote if it does.

13

L bozo

14

Some comments:

"SECTION I: CITATION

A. This act shall be known and cited as the “Executive Services Act”.

SECTION II: DEFINITIONS can be shortened by removing “As referenced in this Act” from each subsection, and putting the defined terms between “”

A. As referenced in this Act, the Delegate is the current, legitimate, elected Delegate of The East Pacific.

B. As referenced in this Act, the Delegate Pro Tempore is any Vizier or previously-elected Delegate who is legally occupying the position of in-game World Assembly Delegate of The East Pacific.

C. As referenced in this Act, a Regional Officer or RO is the World Assembly Delegate-appointed position of the same name in-game.

D. As referenced in this Act, a Border Control Officer is an RO who has been given the in-game power of Border Control.

E. As referenced in this Act, a Designated Vizier is a Vizier chosen by the Praesidium to serve as a Border Control Officer.

F. As referenced in this Act, title refers to the in-game name assigned by the Delegate to a Regional Officer position.

SECTION III: THE CABINET

A. This Act grants the Delegate the liberty and authority to lead, to create and name, to organize, and to staff with Citizens of The East Pacific various Executive Offices / Ministries, within the limitations of this Act, the whole body of the law, and the Concordat. The whole of these Offices shall be known as the Cabinet. [highlight] I think the Concordat does this, not this Act. [/highlight]

B. The Cabinet may assist the Delegate in Executive functions such as but not explicitly limited to extending, approving, or denying embassy requests, World Assembly representation, interregional (foreign) affairs, internal / cultural affairs, and educational efforts. Given the “may”, is this really a necessary subsection?

C. The Delegate shall establish a minimum of one Cabinet Office or Ministry to manage any of, all of, or more than the aforementioned aspects of the Executive. If you want to simplify stuff, you could leave this up to the Delegate entirely.

SECTION IV: EASTERN PACIFIC SOVEREIGN ARMY

A. This Act establishes the Eastern Pacific Sovereign Army, or EPSA, as the sole legitimate military of The East Pacific.

B. The Delegate shall be the highest-ranking member and Commander of the EPSA. The Delegate may appoint a Registered Voter to be the Overseeing Officer, or OO, of the EPSA, who may run the military on the Delegate’s behalf. The command structure of the EPSA may be further staffed by Registered Voters, with the lowest rank being available to Citizens of The East Pacific. The Delegate may dismiss members and reorganize the EPSA at will.

C. The Delegate or designated authority shall establish an official emblem for the EPSA, which may be used in communiqués, displayed by EPSA member nations during missions, and used to replace regional flags during EPSA-led occupations.

D. No member of the EPSA will actively participate in foreign military missions while participating in the EPSA.

E. The EPSA may execute defensive, offensive, or training activities outside of The East Pacific; however, the EPSA is forbidden from “griefing” regions: that is, committing acts intended to destroy a region and/or its community via ejecting or banning native nations, passwording the region, and / or refounding the region; this prohibition is waived in instances where the region systemically promotes, supports, or tolerates Nazi, fascist, or related ideologies, where the region has a known history of griefing other regions, where the region is at war with The East Pacific or a treaty ally of The East Pacific, where the region’s leadership has been punished for committing a summary, indictable, or constitutional offense against The East Pacific, where the region is a Warzone without relations with The East Pacific, or regions being liberated from foreign occupation.

SECTION V: REGIONAL OFFICERS

A. The Delegate shall have, by nature, and shall be able to exercise, within all confines of this Act, the whole body of the law, and the Concordat, all Regional Officer powers granted to them by the role of in-game World Assembly Delegate, and shall be made a Regional Officer with all of these powers by the Delegate Pro Tempore if they do not yet occupy the position in-game.

B. The Delegate may appoint any Citizen as an RO with any of the associated in-game powers besides Border Control, as suits the design of the Cabinet. You don’t need the part behind the comma. The Praesidium shall select five Designated Viziers who must be given the in-game title of “Vizier” and the in-game RO powers of Communications and Border Control by the Delegate. The Administration (Concordat; Article G) may appoint four Citizens as Border Control Officers who must be given the in-game title of “RMB Moderator” by the Delegate to help enforce standards of conduct within the region. The Delegate may incorporate any of the Designated Viziers and/or RMB Moderators into the Cabinet and give them additional RO abilities, within any limitations of the law and Concordat. This last part is a given, and follows already from the Concordat & the first sentence of this section.

C. The Magisterium or the Conclave may prohibit any individual from becoming a Cabinet RO or Designated Vizier for the remainder of the current Delegate’s term or may dismiss a Cabinet RO or Designated Vizier by 2/3 majority vote and prohibit the Delegate or the Viziers from reappointing them for the remainder of the Delegate’s term. The Magisterium may choose to reverse its decision by 2/3 majority vote. Prohibition or dismissal by either body may be appealed to the Conclave. Is the Conclave meant to only rule on the legality of the appealed decision, or is it supposed to choose whether they agree with the decision as a matter of politics?"

15

can be shortened by removing “As referenced in this Act” from each subsection, and putting the defined terms between “”

See, I actually did go through and delete the "As referenced in this Act"s at one point before posting the thread, but then I sat there thinking “well … we have a lot of laws that reference other laws, and I don’t want a definition with very clear parameters to then be misapplied to some use of the same term but with a slightly different meaning in some other law, and I don’t have control over who writes / amends every law…”. It feels safer to keep it in there.

Given the “may”, is this really a necessary subsection?

No. At minimum, I think it behooves us to specify that the Executive has authority over embassy requests; otherwise, I wrote this in there as a nod to the formerly obligatory structure and sort of a suggestion to the uncreative. But if everyone agrees that it’s extraneous I’m happy to delete it.

If you want to simplify stuff, you could leave this up to the Delegate entirely.

Based on Zuk’s reply to this effect I intend to do that.

You don’t need the part behind the comma.

Will delete.

This last part is a given, and follows already from the Concordat & the first sentence of this section.

I just don’t want any confusion. All we need is some delegate who reads one open-ended line that implies that they can do anything despite everything else outlined by the same law & anything else the other laws say and goes “I CAN APPOINT WHOEVER I WANT TO WHATEVER I WANT” and we then need to take them to court over it. Or we then question the validity of the law, or send the law to the Conclave. I definitely added a few comma’d phrases that any reasonable person would agree shouldn’t absolutely need to be in there, but we’re not always handling reasonable people.

Is the Conclave meant to only rule on the legality of the appealed decision, or is it supposed to choose whether they agree with the decision as a matter of politics?

The original Act is just as nondescript, but only regarding the Conclave. To cite it directly:

…5.2- The Magisterium may, through ⅔ affirmative majority vote, order the Delegate to dismiss a Regional Officer for reasons of inactivity or abuse of power OR order the Delegate to change the titles and/or Powers granted to a Regional Officer. Such removals and changes may be appealed to the Conclave.

…6.6- The Conclave may dismiss a Designated Vizier by 2/3 majority vote or through trial verdict.

…6.7- The Magisterium may only dismiss a Designated Vizier, through a 2/3 majority vote, for failure to comply with action on any nation violating an endorsement cap, following procedures in regional law. Such removals may be appealed to the Conclave.

So, in terms of the Conclave removing ROs … both / either. It’s not clear. In terms of the Magis removing ROs, only for some kind of failure or infraction. It then doesn’t specify what the appeal to the Conclave should consider - so again, both / either. It leaves the door open to “I simply don’t trust this RO and therefore demand reversal of the Delegate’s decision to appoint them / deny their appeal.”

16

Big edits made in response to Zuk’s, Aiv’s, & Bach’s posts: see DRAFT 2 and DRAFT 2 BULLET POINTS; I didn’t do the full rework of the Exe section from Aiv’s post:

“B. The duties of the Executive shall be to approve/deny embassy requests, represent the interests of the region in the World Assembly, oversee foreign and domestic affairs, including but not limited to culture, news media, and education.

C. The Ministries may be assigned any number of duties assigned to the Executive.

D. The Delegate shall establish a minimum of one Ministry.”

Because I needed to keep track of everything I changed for now, but that might be on the to-do list for the next round of edits. There’s also still this to be aware of:

Oh one more thing: there is nothing about the Viceroy ordering Viziers to send tgs.

…which, like I said, would probably require amendment to DelElec.

Finally, there’s the incorporation and repeal of PunJust, if that passes, so stay tuned.

17

Looks like all my concerns were more or less addressed (minus those intentional/discussed).

19

What is the purpose of 4.4? One org is dumb, and we have a lot of people within EPSA that are members of other orgs. Are you saying you would like to shoot EPSA in the foot and cause most of command+regualr soliders get poofed?

1 Like
20

As former Overseeing Officer (OO) and current EPSA Commander I must agree with Shadow in that I’m unconvinced for the need of what is effectively a one-org policy. We are understaffed as is; we had nobody available to take up the OO role for weeks on end before Zuk offered himself for the role. In terms of being concerned about foreign involvement being harmful, we could simply limit the membership of EPSA soldiers to only allied militaries, for example.

Did you consult with EPSA command before making the decision that a one-org policy would be the best option? If not, why not?