[PROPOSAL] TEPWA Exclusive Citizenship

The Magisterium
1

I hereby propose the following amendment:

SECTION III: NATURALIZATION

…3.1. Residents seeking to become Citizens must (as listed alphabetically):
…3.1.1. State within their application their Resident nation, which must be a member of the World Assembly (WA)one of their valid Resident nations and their World Assembly (“WA”) nation, and post said application in the medium designated by the Office,
…3.1.2. Respond in confirmation to a telegram sent to both their nations from a Citizenship Official, and
…3.1.3. Have their application accepted by the Office.

…3.2. All applications must list a valid WA Resident nation and all nations listed in an application must be operated by their respective applicants. Applications not meeting these criteria shall be denied.

…3.3. A Citizenship Official shall notify a Resident, via an in-game telegram, on whether their application for Citizenship was accepted or denied.

…3.4. The Office may deny any Citizenship application for reasons of regional security concerns, incomplete application, provision of falsified information and/or ejection from the WA. Said denial may be appealed to the Conclave within two weeks of denial.
…3.4.1. The Praesidium may vote to overrule the Office’s decision to grant Citizenship for reasons of regional security provided the decision is made within two weeks of the citizenship being granted.
…3.4.2. If a telegram from the Citizenship Office is not replied to within fourteen days, the associated citizenship application shall automatically expire, in which case a new citizenship application must be submitted in order to be accepted.

…3.5. Upon becoming a Citizen, a Resident is required to maintain continuous residency and World Assembly status with the CitizenResident nation they stated their application (“recorded CitizenResident nation”). They shall also, maintain continuous WA membership with the nation they stated as their WA nation in their application (“recorded WA nation”).

…3.6. In the event a Citizen wishes to change what nation the Office has noted as their recorded CitizenResident nation or recorded WA nation, they shall request the Office, within the designated Thread, to change one of their recorded nations to a new nation they own. A telegram from the new nation shall be sent to a Citizenship Official.
…3.6.1. A Citizen does not need to send such a telegram if their new nation is their current recorded Resident nation or recorded WA nation.
…3.6.2. A Citizenship Official shall notify a Citizen, via an in-game telegram, once their request for a change is granted by the Office in the Thread.

…3.7. AContinuous World Assembly membership requirements shall not apply to any active soldiers of the Eastern Pacific Sovereign Army (“EPSA”) as verified by the Overseeing Officer must return WA status to their citizen nation whenever they are not actively deployed in a foreign region. The active EPSA soldier must notify the Citizenship office within one week of joining EPSA. EPSA soldiers may maintain private WA status nations over an extended period of time provided the Viziers are made aware of the operation and the deployed nation in question.

…3.7.1. If an EPSA soldier ceases active duty, they have one week within which to declare a World Assembly nation they own to the Office in the designated medium to serve as their citizen recorded WA nation following said declaration. Failure to do so in said time-frame shall invalidate their Citizenship.

…3.8 The Overseeing Officer is mandated to upkeep an updated list of EPSA soldiers for the Citizenship Office to review. If the Overseeing Officer does not keep an updated list, they shall be in dereliction of duty.

SECTION IV: CITIZENSHIP AUDIT

…4.1. A Citizenship shall be invalid in the case the associated citizen nation ceases to exist, exits the World Assembly, exits the region, or leaves service in the EPSA, unless a new, valid citizen nation is listed and approved. 48 hours after they are publicly notified in the Thread by the Office to either (as listed alphabetically):
…4.1.1. No longer maintain residency with their recorded Resident nation at the time of notification,
…4.1.2. No longer maintain WA membership in their recorded WA nation at the time of notification.

…4.2.[remove] If the Citizen returns their recorded Resident nation to the region or their WA membership to their recorded WA nation and issues a notification of such return within the Thread before the 48 hour period established in Section 4.1 expires, their Citizenship shall remain valid.
…4.2.1 The Citizen may also keep their Citizenship valid if they successfully change their recorded Resident nation or recorded WA nation to another nation with valid citizenship or WA membership within the same 48 hour period, following Section 3 procedures.

…4.3. Exceptions to Section 4.1 and its subsections may be established by additional law.[/remove] Any Citizen may reapply for Citizenship upon removal.

…4.34. Any CitizenResident may renounce their Citizenship by notifying the Office in the Thread.

SECTION V: CITIZENSHIP RECORDS

…5.1. The Office shall maintain an official list of all Citizens. Said list shall remain publicly viewable on The East Pacific forums or in an in-game dispatch. The list may be posted in another forum thread besides the Thread if the forums are utilized for this purpose.

…5.2. Approval or denial of a Citizenship application or change of a Citizen’s nations shall be the moment when the Office states within the Thread that an application has been denied or accepted or that a change of nation was accepted.

…5.3. Removal of Citizenship shall be the moment when the Office marks, within the Thread, that a Citizen’s Citizenship is invalid or a Citizen has renounced their registration.

Old Provisions

SECTION III: NATURALIZATION

…3.1. Residents seeking to become Citizens must (as listed alphabetically):
…3.1.1. State within their application one of their valid Resident nations and their World Assembly (“WA”) nation, and post said application in the medium designated by the Office,
…3.1.2. Respond in confirmation to a telegram sent to both their nations from a Citizenship Official, and
…3.1.3. Have their application accepted by the Office.

…3.2. All applications must list a valid WA nation and all nations listed in an application must be operated by their respective applicants. Applications not meeting these criteria shall be denied.

…3.3. A Citizenship Official shall notify a Resident, via an in-game telegram, on whether their application for Citizenship was accepted or denied.

…3.4. The Office may deny any Citizenship application for reasons of regional security concerns, incomplete application, provision of falsified information and/or ejection from the WA. Said denial may be appealed to the Conclave within two weeks of denial.
…3.4.1. The Praesidium may vote to overrule the Office’s decision to grant Citizenship for reasons of regional security.
…3.4.2. If a telegram from the Citizenship Office is not replied to within fourteen days, the associated citizenship application shall automatically expire, in which case a new citizenship application must be submitted in order to be accepted.

…3.5. Upon becoming a Citizen, a Resident is required to maintain continuous residency with the Resident nation they stated their application (“recorded Resident nation”). They shall also, maintain continuous WA membership with the nation they stated as their WA nation in their application (“recorded WA nation”).

…3.6. In the event a Citizen wishes to change what nation the Office has noted as their recorded Resident nation or recorded WA nation, they shall request the Office , within the designated Thread, to change one of their recorded nations to a new nation they own. A telegram from the new nation shall be sent to a Citizenship Official.
…3.6.1. A Citizen does not need to send such a telegram if their new nation is their current recorded Resident nation or recorded WA nation.
…3.6.2. A Citizenship Official shall notify a Citizen, via an in-game telegram, once their request for a change is granted by the Office in the Thread.

…3.7. Continuous World Assembly membership requirements shall not apply to any active soldier of the Eastern Pacific Sovereign Army (“EPSA”) as verified by the Overseeing Officer. The active EPSA soldier must notify the Citizenship office within one week of joining EPSA.
…3.7.1. If an EPSA soldier ceases active duty, they have one week within which to declare a World Assembly nation they own to the Office in the designated medium to serve as their recorded WA nation following said declaration. Failure to do so in said time-frame shall invalidate their Citizenship.

…3.8 The Overseeing Officer is mandated to upkeep an updated list of EPSA soldiers for the Citizenship Office to review. If the Overseeing Officer does not keep an updated list, they shall be in dereliction of duty.

SECTION IV: CITIZENSHIP AUDIT

…4.1. A Citizenship shall be invalid 48 hours after they are publicly notified in the Thread by the Office to either (as listed alphabetically):
…4.1.1. No longer maintain residency with their recorded Resident nation at the time of notification,
…4.1.2. No longer maintain WA membership in their recorded WA nation at the time of notification.

…4.2. If the Citizen returns their recorded Resident nation to the region or their WA membership to their recorded WA nation and issues a notification of such return within the Thread before the 48 hour period established in Section 4.1 expires, their Citizenship shall remain valid.
…4.2.1 The Citizen may also keep their Citizenship valid if they successfully change their recorded Resident nation or recorded WA nation to another nation with valid citizenship or WA membership within the same 48 hour period, following Section 3 procedures.

…4.3. Exceptions to Section 4.1 and its subsections may be established by additional law. Any Citizen may reapply for Citizenship upon removal.

…4.4. Any Resident may renounce their Citizenship by notifying the Office in the Thread.

SECTION V: CITIZENSHIP RECORDS

…5.1. The Office shall maintain an official list of all Citizens. Said list shall remain publicly viewable on The East Pacific forums or in an in-game dispatch. The list may be posted in another forum thread besides the Thread if the forums are utilized for this purpose.

…5.2. Approval or denial of a Citizenship application or change of a Citizen’s nations shall be the moment when the Office states within the Thread that an application has been denied or accepted or that a change of nation was accepted.

…5.3. Removal of Citizenship shall be the moment when the Office marks, within the Thread, that a Citizen’s Citizenship is invalid or a Citizen has renounced their registration.

Act as Amended

SECTION III: NATURALIZATION

…3.1. Residents seeking to become Citizens must:
…3.1.1. State within their application their Resident nation, which must be a member of the World Assembly (WA), and post said application in the medium designated by the Office,
…3.1.2. Respond in confirmation to a telegram sent to both their nations from a Citizenship Official, and
…3.1.3. Have their application accepted by the Office.

…3.2. All applications must list a valid WA Resident nation operated by their respective applicants. Applications not meeting these criteria shall be denied.

…3.3. A Citizenship Official shall notify a Resident, via an in-game telegram, on whether their application for Citizenship was accepted or denied.

…3.4. The Office may deny any Citizenship application for reasons of regional security concerns, incomplete application, provision of falsified information and/or ejection from the WA. Said denial may be appealed to the Conclave within two weeks of denial.
…3.4.1. The Praesidium may vote to overrule the Office’s decision to grant Citizenship for reasons of regional security provided the decision is made within one week of the citizenship being granted.
…3.4.2. If a telegram from the Citizenship Office is not replied to within fourteen days, the associated citizenship application shall automatically expire, in which case a new citizenship application must be submitted in order to be accepted.

…3.5. Upon becoming a Citizen, a Resident is required to maintain continuous residency and World Assembly status with the Citizen nation they stated their application (“recorded Citizen nation”).

…3.6. In the event a Citizen wishes to change what nation the Office has noted as their recorded Citizen nation, they shall request the Office , within the designated Thread, to change one of their recorded nations to a new nation they own. A telegram from the new nation shall be sent to a Citizenship Official.
…3.6.1. A Citizen does not need to send such a telegram if their new nation is their current recorded Resident nation or recorded WA nation.
…3.6.2. A Citizenship Official shall notify a Citizen, via an in-game telegram, once their request for a change is granted by the Office in the Thread.

…3.7. Active soldiers of the Eastern Pacific Sovereign Army (“EPSA”) as verified by the Overseeing Officer must return WA status to their citizen nation whenever they are not actively deployed in a foreign region. The active EPSA soldier must notify the Citizenship office within one week of joining EPSA. EPSA soldiers may maintain private WA status nations over an extended period of time provided the Viziers are made aware of the operation and the deployed nation in question.

…3.8 The Overseeing Officer is mandated to upkeep an updated list of EPSA soldiers for the Citizenship Office to review. If the Overseeing Officer does not keep an updated list, they shall be in dereliction of duty.

SECTION IV: CITIZENSHIP AUDIT

…4.1. A Citizenship shall be invalid in the case the associated citizen nation ceases to exist, exits the World Assembly, exits the region, or leaves service in the EPSA, unless a new, valid citizen nation is listed and approved.

…4.2. Any Citizen may reapply for Citizenship upon removal.

…4.3. Any Citizen may renounce their Citizenship by notifying the Office in the Thread.

SECTION V: CITIZENSHIP RECORDS

…5.1. The Office shall maintain an official list of all Citizens. Said list shall remain publicly viewable on The East Pacific forums or in an in-game dispatch. The list may be posted in another forum thread besides the Thread if the forums are utilized for this purpose.

…5.2. Approval or denial of a Citizenship application or change of a Citizen’s nations shall be the moment when the Office states within the Thread that an application has been denied or accepted or that a change of nation was accepted.

…5.3. Removal of Citizenship shall be the moment when the Office marks, within the Thread, that a Citizen’s Citizenship is invalid or a Citizen has renounced their registration.

2

Here’s the rundown: I don’t feel particularly strongly about this amendment, but I do feel particularly strongly about having this discussion. It’s clear there needs to be at least SOME change in our current system of citizenship, so I want us to talk through what it should look like.

3

Why merge residency and WA membership in the first place? I fear that it would invalidate a large portion of citizenships, especially those who want to run their own regions while maintaining citizenship in TEP. Considering if someone wishes to make their region a Frontier, which as we know strips the region of a Governor and instead relies on a World Assembly delegate for executive power… and we all know the rules on WA multis, if this were to go through they’d have to either convert back to a Stronghold (which takes a minimum of 14 days depending on regional influence) or abandon the region just so they can move WA to a resident nation in order to keep their citizenship.

I bring this up as someone who has her own region (despite not having Delegate status), and it’s a valid concern in my opinion.

4

At present I oppose for two reasons:

  1. There has to be a non-WA waiver. I think having the entire Praesidium vote on an application is enough - but one has to exist. I personally can’t really support WA citizenship without at least some pathway for interested people who really can’t be WA here but wanna be part of TEP nonetheless.

  2. If we go back to the “you instantly loose Citizenship if you don’t meet the requirements” thing then we’re going to return to people constantly being at risk of disenfranchising themselves. I wrote that suspension in specifically to stop that situation and thus I’m hardcore against its removal. Security is important but if we make our region so secure our senior officials are at high risk of loosing citizenship then that seems problematic to me. Not denying the system could be written better to prevent loopholes, but I firmly believe the core system of a few day suspension and chance to fix errors should stay.

5

I don’t know - I feel like making citizenship WA-exclusive would exclude a great portion of the TEP citizenry already, including those that are active in Valsora and Urth who don’t particularly get involved in WA affairs nor do they particularly want to.

6

With regard to this point, there are eleven citizens with WAs outside TEP as of the last Citizenship Audit: Aurora, Gong, Pauline, 2nd East Asia/7 Trees, GloryGlory/Anna Airters, you, Tom, Simone Republic, Ambis, Vulbania, and New Anarchisticstan.

Pauline and Aurora are Delegates in major NSGP regions, you’re in your own region, and the other eight are members of major NSGP regions. Aurora and Pauline are in regions that are extremely friendly with us and have significantly integrated themselves into our community, so their loyalty is very difficult to question. Your region isn’t well-established and you are a TEP native, so you’re not a security threat.

However, those other eight people, as much as I like them, have chosen another region first and this region second. We are not a top priority to them. Now, as long as they don’t have to choose between us, they’re fine, but what happens when they feel obliged to choose? What happens if we start discussing a treaty repeal with their home region? What happens if we hold a military operation on the other side of them?

The Python was a member of EPSA and a cosmo defender who ran his own region. He used information he learned from EPSA to stage a defense of a planned EPSA target. This is not the most extreme example – that would be if Python or anyone else was a bit more subtle, gaining power and influence, getting into positions of power, and influencing us towards their region’s ideology. What happens if our whole FA Council is from BOM, or The Grey Wardens? What does that do for our neutrality?

There’s also the consideration of past coup attempts. In 2008, members of TWP known as the Empire attacked TEP and sought to capture it. After they were defeated, their remnants – mostly members of LWU – came back and tried to coup us again in 2019. In the heights of the New Pacific Order, it sent its agents into other GCRs to take them over from within. There were also attempts to infiltrate and influence TEP by defenders.

The point is, we have a lot of enemies and there are a lot of non-enemies that feel strongly enough about their #1 priority that they may use their #2 or 3 or 4 priority to to advance their #1’s interest. When we’re not #1 we have a right to be wary of them. There are a couple ways of dealing with this, but WA-only citizenship is the most effective.

As I said, I don’t feel very strongly about it. A lot of the people on that list are people I like and respect. However, when it comes to citizenship, the only thing it imparts is (1) the right to vote, (2) the right to be a Magister, and (3) the right to be Delegate. The last one already requires their WA in TEP and for the others, I think we need to consider where people’s loyalties lie. In my ideal world, we have a system that includes the Auroras, Gongs, Paulines, and Vixens of the world and excludes the Neenees, Fedeles, and Nagatars of the world. Unfortunately, we have to make a difficult choice.

I do appreciate your input though and I completely understand all the points you’re making. I’m not entirely sold on this proposal, so I do enjoy hearing all sides.

7

Many of the people that fall under that category also fall under the category of “People who don’t want citizenship.” Remember, non-cits have all the rights and privileges of prior systems of citizen/resident divides, so the only reason would be to vote, be a Magister, or be Delegate.

8

I think that…defeats the point of this amendment, but I kind of like this idea tbh. I want to hear what more people have to say about it. The problem is making mistakes (which is the same problem as under the current system) but we could just alternatively raise the burden of proof – we only let in people we KNOW are good vs we only bar people we KNOW are bad, you know?

Okay but like what are errors are we preventing here? And what is the benefit of permitting slip ups vs letting people just reapply for citizenship?

9

Figured I’d correct one point even though it’s not particularly relevant aside from topic:

My WA has been moved back to Clockwork Multiverse (which is in TEP) following the temporary WA ban on Multiversal Alliances.

All in all, I see your point, I was just seeing this from the eyes of those who do have WA obligations in other regions (as regions might very well require or at least recommend WA status for security reasons, like how we have the Viziers).

10

I think that…defeats the point of this amendment, but I kind of like this idea tbh. I want to hear what more people have to say about it.

I honestly don’t think it has to defeat the purpose, just to note. Bringing your WA here is mostly to make it harder for coupers to bring their friends (who are way more likely to be passive and not care about the coup as much). I don’t think those individuals this target will be too likely to go for a Vizier-waiver, especially if we state in law this is more something to let in people who have become noted community members and not just any random newbie.

Okay but like what are errors are we preventing here? And what is the benefit of permitting slip ups vs letting people just reapply for citizenship?
“Errors” is just me being clear the current system as its legally written could use some work (esp in terms of relation with prohibition) whilst keeping the suspension around.

The main point, which is your second sentence, is because high gov officials and Delegate candidates have a history of messing up this stuff at the most inopportune times. Case A:

image
image1119×604 96.1 KB

Case B: Atlae and Altys leaving WA as Delegates

Theoretical case C: A Vizier leaving the region on accident (looses citizenship = looses viziership).

I also think it’s important to note that many people can be pretty invested in TEP BUT not in the on-site game. If these people end up loosing Citizenship right at Delegate elections - they can’t get it back and thus get disenfranchised, even if in theory they could be one of our most active off-site community members.

I’m not denying that for anyone who isn’t a Delegate/Arbiter/Vizier, loosing Citizenship is probably not hard to fix up outside of Delegate elections. But I do think that the slight gain in security is overbeaten by the potential of gov officials just loosing citizenship due to slip ups.

11

I agree with Zuk’s waiver clause for extreme cases.

Apart from that, I think a minor amendment is needed - EPSA soldiers on extended operations should report to the OO, not the Viziers. The viziers can ask the OO for the status report of soldiers when checks are conducted

1 Like
12

How about a provision stating that if a nation holds a citizenship-associated office, they have a three day period to reapply? And then as long as they apply within that three day period, as long as their citizenship is confirmed before their application expires, they get to keep the job? That way, we still have heightened scrutiny for people that make mistakes that they really shouldn’t have while making sure it’s not the end of the world AND while making sure that people just outright neglecting TEP aren’t given as much leeway.

13

You shouldn’t view your time in TEP as a part time commitment, I feel like we need to promote regional thinking over cosmo thinking. Full support

14

I’m gonna push back on that. The Viziers run the Citizenship Office and they need to know that the soldier is actually on an operation and not just saying they are while applying for citizenship under a puppet or in another WA-only region, or even joining another military. They need to make sure compliance is being maintained, because if it isn’t, that’s a security issue they need to handle. Under the current EPSA Act, I don’t think soldiers can do any op that’s not sanctioned by the OO or an appointee thereof anyway, so it shouldn’t create any legal loopholes for rogue ops.

15

I do support the amendment in general although I’m sure this bill could definitely be refined as I’m sure some people will see cases as Zuk mentioned in which this bill will cause some exceptional cases and dillemmas. I will ask that specifically that Section V: Citizenship Records be further amended, as in closed discussions with the Viziers, I have pointed out the failures of this section when it comes to enforcing specifically Prohibition.

16

What?

What changes do you think need to be made?

17

I do think a strong rework of 5.3 in which Removal of Citizenship should be the moment in which the WA nation is removed, rather than when the Office announces such a removal, we had this discussion prior in which I argued by the letter of the wording, the grey area regarding their citizenship could have been a solid defence in invaliding a prohibition

18

I agree the Viziers need to know, but the chain of command should be to report to the OO.

The viziers can go over to the OO and ask “Where on earth is this soldier”, and the OO would be supposed to know when was the last time that soldier piled/tagged/WAlock on an operation. The OO maintains the list of who has cross membership, who’s doing what and where they are.

That’s why as the soldiers report to the OO, the OO has all the details needed to report to the viziers. The chain of command is simple. Soldiers → OO → Vizier/Cit Office

19

I don’t understand this point, but I’ll make this change anyway to comply with 4.1 – which I’ll change back if enough people voice their support for Zuk’s position.

20

That’s fair but I think the disconnect here is that I’m trying to ensure the Viziers don’t have to ask and wait for a response to know where citizens’ WAs are – imo they should know at all times for security reasons. OOs aren’t as subject to scrutiny with their appointment as Viziers and so I don’t think the legal system should provide any sort of informational monopoly to them at the expense of the Viziers.