Standing Orders Discussion

The Magisterium
21

The people who have already worked hard, proven themselves (even a little bit), and made the region their main priority are the ones that should shape its legislation. Maybe I’m misunderstanding something but it baffles me that you would propose a change that would allow NSGP to shape our region by simply dropping a puppet and joining the Magisterium.

While I agree that we should streamline and remove some of the complexity from entry into the Magisterium, it absolutely does not mean that it should be an open door for entry. The WA nation is a basic requirement to show us the East is their priority.

Sent from my BlackBerry Pearl using Tapatalk

22

You must have missed the various alternatives I listed to prevent just anybody dropping in.

We should be thinking this through instead of changing some details.

23

Circling to Bach’s post, I’ll look them over one-by-one:

  • I agree with the first part. There’s a lot of needless stuff added that either doesn’t make sense, or is kind of pointless. Some is alright, some isn’t.
  • I think it could be difficult to find folks who aren’t in any governmental role in another region. I think there are Magisters right now who probably serve another region in some capacity.
  • We used to elect Magisters a long time ago. We elected the quarterly. We moved away from that because it would seem Magisters would be very active in the first month, not as much the second, and even less on the third month. Plus, there were those who wanted to join in, but we had to tell them they missed elections and would have to wait.
  • I am hesitant on adding to bureaucracy when we are currently struggling with numbers.

That being said, I personally do appreciate the ideas, and I didn’t mean to come across as just glibly shooting them down.

I’ve spent part of the day trying to solve this problem. Ultimately, what is the goal in all this red tape? It’s to ensure, or at least aid, TEP’s legislature in being full of TEPers. It’s to help provide guidance to future TEPers, those who will be here when we’re hopefully, one day, retired. I think we need to think in terms of that type of longevity.

Ultimately, what’s a strong litmus test to quantitatively show that a nation is committed to the region? WA nation, yes, activity levels as well. But that’s going to be hard to quantify and even harder to enforce. We do have public disclosures whereby one must state (and update) what regions they are a part of and so on. Perhaps we establish a “region cap”, preventing X number of nations from Y region / faction to join the Magisterium and preventing us from being overrun? But even that would be difficult to catch, and, likely, enforce.

24

— Begin quote from ____

Ultimately, what’s a strong litmus test to quantitatively show that a nation is committed to the region? WA nation, yes, activity levels as well. But that’s going to be hard to quantify and even harder to enforce. We do have public disclosures whereby one must state (and update) what regions they are a part of and so on. Perhaps we establish a “region cap”, preventing X number of nations from Y region / faction to join the Magisterium and preventing us from being overrun? But even that would be difficult to catch, and, likely, enforce.

— End quote

That sounds like something Tim could monitor. There is precedent for an arbitrary blacklist in that situation, though the exact details would be for the Conclave to decide.

Sent from my BlackBerry Pearl using Tapatalk

25

— Begin quote from ____

  • I agree with the first part. There’s a lot of needless stuff added that either doesn’t make sense, or is kind of pointless. Some is alright, some isn’t.
  • I think it could be difficult to find folks who aren’t in any governmental role in another region. I think there are Magisters right now who probably serve another region in some capacity.
  • We used to elect Magisters a long time ago. We elected the quarterly. We moved away from that because it would seem Magisters would be very active in the first month, not as much the second, and even less on the third month. Plus, there were those who wanted to join in, but we had to tell them they missed elections and would have to wait.
  • I am hesitant on adding to bureaucracy when we are currently struggling with numbers.

— End quote

I’m inclined to agree with this, for the most part. I like to take things from the perspective of someone who is new to the game and isn’t too familiar with how things work when we’re discussing things like this. Considering that, I think that the current rules regarding the Magisterium make a lot of sense to encourage, and on some level enforce activity among those who want to join the legislature. They also make it that much harder for people who just want to run through a ton of regions and imagine they ought to have a vote in the legislatures of all of them. However, the flip side of this is that the way these rules are set out, I feel that it can make things confusing for people. Between these rules being what they are and the lack of forum masking badges (which I recognize is another issue entirely), I think that it’s easy for new players to get easily confused and turned off by the whole thing. Paring them down to what makes the most sense from a security perspective and from a newbie perspective is something the region ought to aim for.

Additionally, I just wanted to add that I think having an endorsement from a current member of the Magisterium is a good idea. It would still attain the goal of keeping the sanctity of the chamber, but also allow people a clear pathway into it. Those are just my two cents!  https://groups.tapatalk-cdn.com/smilies/52127/1536592180.1703-smiley.gif?ttinline=true

26

If we do go that route, I have an idea. You know how we require that one lists their WA nation when they vote? Why not have them list their organizations when they vote, too? Or require that they must have their disclosure updated prior to any vote?

Heck, that way we could actually relax our WA requirement. Truthfully, when I circle back to a previous argument, there have been nations that did serve this body (and region) well while their WA was elsewhere in someone’s army or in another region. This way, we can monitor the groups and their level of involvement in our legislature without necessarily stressing that stipulation. I think it’s a nice compromise.

How does that sound? Also, are there any comments/thoughts from the other Magisters here? This is our chance to make this thing work, to fix our standing orders and streamline!

27

Magisters? Anything further?

If not, I will attempt to re-draft the standing orders that better suit the current climate of discussion.

28

— Begin quote from ____

Magisters? Anything further?

If not, I will attempt to re-draft the standing orders that better suit the current climate of discussion.

— End quote

I’m in the middle of drafting modified orders and will have it out for a vote shortly.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

29

I’ll wait until some of these redraft ideas have been presented here to extensively comment on the most recent suggestions, but I do think that it’d make more sense to require the disclosures be updated before a vote rather than have a limit on the number of regions you can be in. There are often cases where people are technically Citizens of other regions but pretty much have no involvement or activity there and sometimes people even forget they’re Citizens of regions still! Noting that, it would only make sense if you applied the cap to regions where the individual is participating actively in the government and, even then, I don’t see that as the best option presented so far. I am also 100% in favor of maintaining the WA requirement.

30

"There are often cases where people are technically Citizens of other regions but pretty much have no involvement or activity there and sometimes people even forget they’re Citizens of regions still! "

I would think it to be a good thing to strongly discourage such a practice.

I’m curious as to the announced draft.

31

OK. I’m approaching this as a divide and conquer scenario. Let’s attack the first section, them move onto the others.

I think that we all can agree that there needs to be simplification in the laws and make it so that there are less barriers to entry.
Instead of using cross-outs and adding text to the original, I have used the original as a template and removed items, combined items, and made other changes.

So let’s discuss the section ACCEPTANCE OF MAGISTERS…

[spoiler]
— Begin quote from ____

SECTION I. ACCEPTANCE OF MAGISTERS

…1.1- Citizens wishing to become Magisters must do all of the following:
…1.1.1- Recite the Magister’s Pledge in the appropriate designated location in the Magisterium sub-forum;
…1.1.2- Be a Citizen of TEP for at least one month prior to application;
…1.1.3- Be a WA Member with their TEP resident nation;
…1.1.4- Supply the name of their resident WA nation, except if their WA nation is involved in EPSA, in which case it may remain classified;
…1.1.5- Complete a Public Official Disclosure Form;
…1.1.6- Have posted at least 10 times in the TEP forum.
…1.2- Citizens wishing to become Magisters must have accomplished at least 3 of the following:
…1.2.1- Endorse the Delegate and all Viziers;
…1.2.2- Comment on, or debate legislation in the Magisterium as a citizen three times;
…1.2.3- Complete a course, practicum, tenure or academic publication in The East Pacific University;
…1.2.4- Contribute to ‘TEP Evolved’ subforum five times;
…1.2.5- Join and contribute to an Executive ministry, service or agency, including the EPSA, evidenced by recognition of contribution by an Executive minister or, in case of EPSA, the General.
…1.3-The Magisterium shall, by majority vote, decide whether the new Candidate-Magister will be accepted.
…1.4- Citizens who are denied acceptance into the Magisterium may appeal the decision and demand a referendum from all citizens of The East Pacific:
…1.4.1- The appellant must present a petition for Regional Referendum on Magister Acceptance to the Conclave, endorsed by at least 5 citizens;
…1.4.2- The petition will be reviewed by the Conclave and if valid, the Conclave will schedule a regional election;
…1.4.3- If elected by a majority vote of the citizens voting in the election, the appellant will be accepted into the Magisterium.

— End quote

[/spoiler]
My revised and simplified SECTION I:
SECTION I. ACCEPTANCE OF MAGISTERS

1.1- Citizens wishing to become Magisters must do all of the following:
    1.1.1- Be a Citizen of TEP;
    1.1.2- Be a WA Member with their TEP resident nation;
    1.1.3- Supply the name of their resident WA nation, except if their WA nation is involved in EPSA, in which case it may remain classified;
    1.1.4- Endorse the Delegate and all Viziers;
    1.1.5- Complete a Public Official Disclosure Form;
    1.1.6- Complete a course, practicum, tenure or academic publication in The East Pacific University;
    1.1.7- Post on the RMB at least three times;
    1.1.8- Contribute to ‘TEP Evolved’ subforum at least three times;
    1.1.9- Join and contribute to an Executive ministry, service or agency, including EPSA, evidenced by recognition of contribution by an Executive Minister or the Delegate;
    1.1.10- Recite the Magister’s Pledge in the appropriate designated location in the Magisterium sub-forum;

1.2-The Magisterium shall, by majority vote, decide whether the new Candidate-Magister will be accepted.

1.3- Citizens who are denied acceptance into the Magisterium may appeal the decision to the Conclave;
    1.3.1- The appellant must present a petition on Magister Acceptance to the Conclave, listing their qualifications for the Magisterium and their reasons why they feel the Magisterium vote should be declared invalid. The petition must be endorsed by at least 5 citizens;
    1.3.2- The contents of the petition will be reviewed by the Conclave and if valid, the Conclave will instruct the Provost to present the contents of the petition to the Magisterium and schedule a new election;
    1.3.3- If elected by a majority vote of the Magisterium, the appellant will be accepted into the Magisterium.
    1.3.4- There is no appeal of a second Magisterium election.

32

As written by this proposal, a new applicant would need to comply with all 10 conditions (1.1.2 - 1.1.11), who need to be renumbered by the way. That’s way too strict I believe.

I would propose to eliminate conditions 1.1.7 to 1.1.10.

Shouldn’t we also include language to clarify that these conditions must not only be satisfied when applying, but also throughout one’s tenure as a Magister?

33

My apologies on the numbering. I have revised my post to reflect the proper numbering scheme.

— Begin quote from ____

1.1.6- Complete a course, practicum, tenure or academic publication in The East Pacific University;

— End quote

I actually found doing the course on the Government and history of TEP to be enlightening and it greatly helped my understanding of the region as a relatively new resident.

— Begin quote from ____

1.1.7- Post on the RMB at least three times;
1.1.8- Contribute to ‘TEP Evolved’ subforum at least three times;

— End quote

I think that this is a minimum thing to do and shouldn’t be all that hard to accomplish. The RP subforums and the RMB are important aspects of the region that have historically been ignored by the Government and posting a few times will demonstrate that a candidate has at least seen those areas of the region.

— Begin quote from ____

1.1.9- Join and contribute to an Executive ministry, service or agency, including EPSA, evidenced by recognition of contribution by an Executive Minister or the Delegate;

— End quote

I don’t think that you want someone to use the Magisterium as their first foray into the Government. Let them demonstrate a willingness to work for the region before giving them the ability to change our laws.

— Begin quote from ____

Shouldn’t we also include language to clarify that these conditions must not only be satisfied when applying, but also throughout one’s tenure as a Magister?

— End quote

This discussion is about the acceptance of the Magisters. We can address that in the REMOVAL OF MAGISTERS section.

34

I don’t think we should get rid of 1.1.7 through 1.1.10. I think it is important to encourage activity and engagement across the board with new folks before they jump into an important position like this. It also shows that they are dedicated to TEP by completing all requirements.

35

These requirements effectively tell new, interested TEP people that they are not welcome as Magisters unless they’ve done everything else in the region. I don’t see the problem with letting them serve in the Magisterium before doing anything in the Executive, or in roleplay, or the UTEP… you shouldn’t be surprised that the number of Magisters keeps going down if new people are effectively discouraged from getting involved here. I can perfectly imagine people being interested in the Magisterium, without having any interest whatsoever in the other branches of government, or roleplay.

36

— Begin quote from ____

These requirements effectively tell new, interested TEP people that they are not welcome as Magisters unless they’ve done everything else in the region. I don’t see the problem with letting them serve in the Magisterium before doing anything in the Executive, or in roleplay, or the UTEP… you shouldn’t be surprised that the number of Magisters keeps going down if new people are effectively discouraged from getting involved here. I can perfectly imagine people being interested in the Magisterium, without having any interest whatsoever in the other branches of government, or roleplay.

— End quote

I agree. These proposed measures actually feel more restrictive than what it is currently, which counters the whole rationale of the change. I think there’s a case to be made for doing a course in UTEP to give a better understanding before entering, but having to contribute to the executive (which, from my experience, does not always need help and is actually for the most part kind of stagnant) as well as get involved in roleplay (personally I had very little interest in doing that when I initially applied for the Magisterium, but did it just because of the requirements) is excessive.

37

A few thoughts:

The general thinking makes sense to me here. Engaging in Evolved is a great way to gain an understanding of the region. Taking a course in the university is another good way. It doesn’t seem to me that both should be required. While the sentiment that a high standard should apply in order to change the laws of the region is appreciated, some of these requirements could be either/or.

The WA requirement is a basic expectation, in my mind, that shows the East is their region of priority before they start shaping our legislation. NSGP may not like it but that’s their problem. Many subversives have been turned away by this basic expectation.

Time requirements are counterproductive.

Sent from my BlackBerry Pearl using Tapatalk

38

I think I’m leaning in the direction that most seem to be. For those wishing to be a Magister, why not just give them the bare minimum and allow the Magisterium to judge whether or not they should be let in? I know there’s talk from the peanut gallery, but six is a rather low number for Magisters, and lower numbers typically mean discussions take a bit longer as there are less resources to go around.

I would say that in 1.1, 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 are essential as things stand right now. 4 is helpful, but not required especially if there is some kind of transitory thing occurring like a new Vizier, and I’d hate for someone to be denied on a technicality. 6 is a very good idea. And I love 8. But we could word 6 and 8 and even 9 as encouragements, not requirements.

But I think I have a different idea. If we are willing to monitor regions in the manner with which I proposed earlier, I would be willing to soften the WA requirement in favor of that. To be honest, this body has had good members in the past who were not WA but were in the Magisterium. The real trouble, in my opinion, is getting too many from one particular faction into our ranks, and it wouldn’t be a stretch for a region to WA up in TEP and join the Magisterium with the hopes of influencing the region. This would be monitored in the disclosures which, if I had my druthers, every Magister would need to ensure it is updated prior to any vote. Placing a cap at, say, no more than 33% of the Magisterium may be comprised of nations that claim membership in any one particular external region, would ensure that no region can subvert this body, I would assume.

It would be the duty of the Provost, or a nation appointed by the provost, to check and validate this.

39

I think that we have had some very good discussion on this and I hear you when you talk about required vs optional. While I still feel that all of those items will result in a well-rounded candidate, I definitely get that it may be too much for a new person to do. Therefore, I would like to revise my proposal to the following.

— Begin quote from ____

SECTION I. ACCEPTANCE OF MAGISTERS

1.1- Citizens wishing to become Magisters must do all of the following:
    1.1.1- Be a Citizen of TEP;
    1.1.2- Be a WA Member with their TEP resident nation;
    1.1.3- Supply the name of their resident WA nation, except if their WA nation is involved in EPSA, in which case it may remain classified;
    1.1.4- Endorse the Delegate and all Viziers;
    1.1.5- Complete a Public Official Disclosure Form;
    1.1.6- Join and contribute to an Executive ministry, service or agency, including EPSA, evidenced by recognition of contribution by an Executive Minister or the Delegate;
    1.1.7- Recite the Magister’s Pledge in the appropriate designated location in the Magisterium sub-forum;

1.2- It is recommended, but not required, that Citizens wishing to become Magisters do the following:
    1.2.1- Complete a course, practicum, tenure or academic publication in The East Pacific University;
    1.2.2- Post on the RMB at least three times;
    1.2.3- Contribute to ‘TEP Evolved’ subforum at least three times;

1.3-The Magisterium shall, by majority vote, decide whether a new Magister will be accepted.

1.4- Citizens who are denied acceptance into the Magisterium may appeal the decision to the Conclave;
    1.4.1- The appellant must present a petition on Magister Acceptance to the Conclave, listing their qualifications for the Magisterium and their reasons why they feel the original Magisterium vote should be declared invalid. The petition must be endorsed by at least 5 citizens;
    1.4.2- The contents of the petition will be reviewed by the Conclave and if valid, the Conclave will instruct the Provost to present the contents of the petition to the Magisterium and schedule a new election;
    1.4.3- If elected by a majority vote of the Magisterium, the applicant will be accepted into the Magisterium.
    1.4.4- There is no appeal of a second Magister election, however, the candidate can reapply in 30 days from the end of the second election.

— End quote

In essence, the required section breaks down to; citizen with a regional WA and working in a ministry. That is definitely not too much to expect of a Magisterium candidate.

40

I like the compromises. We maintain a few of the more meaningful requirements and include a section to still promote the other areas we think they should get involved in before applying, without making them requirements. The changes make applicants have a little less to do before they can apply but still help to enforce a sense of commitment to TEP before they can as well.