[Query] Why is regional World Assembly membership mandatory?

[Enfaru]

Dear Techies,

I've been... looking into the World Assembly resolutions, notably the first two and I can't see anything that suggests that all regions must be signed up to the World Assembly organization. So...why are we all automatically enrolled? O.o

[Wallenburg]

They aren't. I have my own puppet storage region, and it doesn't require any membership with the WA.

[Enfaru]

You try stopping the WA Delegate from voting on behalf of your region. It's not possible. Your region can vote as many times as it likes to remove itself from the WA so that it doesn't have a WA delegate...and yet... it remains.

Edit: I'm not talking about national membership, I'm talking about regional membership.

Whether you individually join the WA is indeed optional. Whether your region joins the WA is not.

[Wallenburg]

You try stopping the WA Delegate from voting on behalf of your region. It's not possible. Your region can vote as many times as it likes to remove itself from the WA so that it doesn't have a WA delegate...and yet... it remains.

Edit: I'm not talking about national membership, I'm talking about regional membership.

Whether you individually join the WA is indeed optional. Whether your region joins the WA is not.

Regions are not forced to have delegates. You can very easily keep members from endorsing one another if you want.

[Gruenberg]

There is no such thing as "regional membership" of the WA, nor would there be any rule against a Founder creating a region and then ejecting anyone who joined the WA.

[Enfaru]

There is no such thing as "regional membership" of the WA, nor would there be any rule against a Founder creating a region and then ejecting anyone who joined the WA.

Lets assume the Founder is inactive for I dunno. One week. It's populated by 20 members. Two WA nations join. Founder isn't around to ban them. They endorse each other. They vote on a matter and thereby represent all 22 members in one go.

If the founder falls inactive, WA Delegate position is automatically made executive (rightly or wrongly, whether against the founders or regional wishes or not).

There is no way to disable or remove the WA Delegate position.

QED. For regions, it's mandatory that if they have WA members and WA members endorse each other that it is part of the World Assembly.

Edit: Good luck stopping members endorsing each other. This is also not what I'm asking, I'm quite happy with members endorsing each other. I am just curious why a Region absolutely has to be represented at the World Assembly? Why isn't it optional, why can't a region join the WA of their own volition?

[Gruenberg]

Lets assume the Founder is inactive for I dunno.

Let's not.

NS gameplay is based on the idea that there exists an active Founder. If the Founder is not active, the regional is vulnerable to invasion, nevermind the mechanics of WA resolution voting.

[Wallenburg]

There is no such thing as "regional membership" of the WA, nor would there be any rule against a Founder creating a region and then ejecting anyone who joined the WA.

Lets assume the Founder is inactive for I dunno. One week.

Well that sounds like a personal problem to me.

It's populated by 20 members. Two WA nations join. Founder isn't around to ban them. They endorse each other. They vote on a matter and thereby represent all 22 members in one go.

That's not how delegates or WA membership works. Besides, you need two endorsements to become WA delegate.

If the founder falls inactive, WA Delegate position is automatically made executive (rightly or wrongly, whether against the founders or regional wishes or not).

That's bullshit.

There is no way to disable or remove the WA Delegate position.

Yes, there is. Ban WA nations.

QED. For regions, it's mandatory that if they have WA members and WA members endorse each other that it is part of the World Assembly.

Regions are not part of the WA, as Gruen said. They simply have WA members.

Edit: Good luck stopping members endorsing each other. This is also not what I'm asking, I'm quite happy with members endorsing each other. I am just curious why a Region absolutely has to be represented at the World Assembly?

Again, it doesn't. I have an entire region of totally non-WA puppets. Nothing there is represented at the WA.

[Enfaru]

Exactly how is it vulnerable to raiding if the WA Delegate position is entirely optional (it isn't, it's currently mandatory without any WA resolution whatsoever)?

Okay lets assume the Founder is active, every other week or so because that's all the time they have instead. Thereby complying with your first sentence.

Wallenburg,

Okay, lets just switch the numbers around then. 20 normal members of which none are WA members, three WA members join, they all endorse one WA member. They vote on a matter and thereby represent all 23 members in one go.

While you may think it is bullshit, in practice if the founder CTEs (falls inactive) the WA Delegate position is automatically made executive (as soon as a WA nation joins I assume).

Unfortunately banning all WA nations does not disable nor remove the WA Delegate position, it just makes it unfilled. If the Founder doesn't get on in time to ban WA members and they endorse each other and vote, there's nothing the founder or any of the other regional members can do to stop them.

[Gruenberg]

Everything you are saying is simply a rehash of the arguments that players who are opposed to R/D (by all accounts, the majority of players in the game) have made. Making the delegate optional would immediately kill the R/D game because no nation would choose to make themselves vulnerable to invasion, and raiders wouldn't bother invading a region they couldn't gain delegate access to. But the admins have never been willing to end R/D, so the compromise they came up with was Founders, tweaked by adding Liberations for founderless regions.

[Wallenburg]

Wallenburg,

Okay, lets just switch the numbers around then. 20 normal members of which none are WA members, three WA members join, they all endorse one WA member. They vote on a matter and thereby represent all 23 members in one go.

Still not how WA representation works. Are you actually reading my posts?

While you may think it is bullshit, in practice if the founder CTEs (falls inactive) the WA Delegate position is automatically made executive (as soon as a WA nation joins I assume).

You set the hypothetical founder's inactivity at a length of a week. Nations do not CTE in a week. Get your word choice straightened out.

Unfortunately banning all WA nations does not disable nor remove the WA Delegate position, it just makes it unfilled. If the Founder doesn't get on in time to ban WA members and they endorse each other and vote, there's nothing the founder or any of the other regional members can do to stop them.

Again, that is a personal problem. If a founder is too lazy or otherwise preoccupied to enforce their rules, they probably shouldn't have taken on the responsibility of running a region in the first place. Besides, what exactly is the problem with having a delegate for a couple days? They can do literally nothing but cast a slightly more powerful vote than non-delegates. They won't exactly be hurting the region.

[Enfaru]

Wallenburg,

Okay, lets just switch the numbers around then. 20 normal members of which none are WA members, three WA members join, they all endorse one WA member. They vote on a matter and thereby represent all 23 members in one go.

Still not how WA representation works. Are you actually reading my posts?

While you may think it is bullshit, in practice if the founder CTEs (falls inactive) the WA Delegate position is automatically made executive (as soon as a WA nation joins I assume).

You set the hypothetical founder's inactivity at a length of a week. Nations do not CTE in a week. Get your word choice straightened out.

Unfortunately banning all WA nations does not disable nor remove the WA Delegate position, it just makes it unfilled. If the Founder doesn't get on in time to ban WA members and they endorse each other and vote, there's nothing the founder or any of the other regional members can do to stop them.

Again, that is a personal problem. If a founder is too lazy or otherwise preoccupied to enforce their rules, they probably shouldn't have taken on the responsibility of running a region in the first place. Besides, what exactly is the problem with having a delegate for a couple days? They can do literally nothing but cast a slightly more powerful vote than non-delegates. They won't exactly be hurting the region.

You said, you needed two endorsements to be a WA delegate. Three WA members. 2 WA Members Endorse 1 WA Member. 1 WA Member becomes delegate. Takes 1 update to get promoted and about three days to have their vote reflected on a resolution.

If a founder is inactive for a week, it takes less than that for three WA nations to come in, endorse each other, get a WA delegate position, vote on a WA resolution and bugger off before the Founder even manages to login again. If a Founder is inactive for 30 days they typically CTE and suddenly the WA Delegate position becomes executive...or executive as soon as a WA nation moves in (not sure which).

Representing the region, even though the region doesn't want to be represented? You don't think that's a problem?

Still none of this answers the query about why regional World Assembly membership is mandatory from day one. Why are regions assumed to have a seat at the table of the World Assembly?

[Wallenburg]

Still not how WA representation works. Are you actually reading my posts?

You set the hypothetical founder's inactivity at a length of a week. Nations do not CTE in a week. Get your word choice straightened out.

Again, that is a personal problem. If a founder is too lazy or otherwise preoccupied to enforce their rules, they probably shouldn't have taken on the responsibility of running a region in the first place. Besides, what exactly is the problem with having a delegate for a couple days? They can do literally nothing but cast a slightly more powerful vote than non-delegates. They won't exactly be hurting the region.

You said, you needed two endorsements to be a WA delegate. Three WA members. 2 WA Members Endorse 1 WA Member. 1 WA Member becomes delegate. Takes 1 update to get promoted and about three days to have their vote reflected on a resolution.

If a founder is inactive for a week, it takes less than that for three WA nations to come in, endorse each other, get a WA delegate position, vote on a WA resolution and bugger off before the Founder even manages to login again. If a Founder is inactive for 30 days they typically CTE and suddenly the WA Delegate position becomes executive...or executive as soon as a WA nation moves in (not sure which).

Representing the region, even though the region doesn't want to be represented? You don't think that's a problem?

Still none of this answers the query about why regional World Assembly membership is mandatory from day one. Why are regions assumed to have a seat at the table of the World Assembly?

Yep, you aren't reading my posts. Fine then, I'll stop posting.

[Enfaru]

*shrugs* I responded to each clause. Aside from "you need two endorsements to become WA delegate" you have not explained how WA representation works in the slightest.

[Bears Armed]

There is no such thing as "regional membership" of the WA, nor would there be any rule against a Founder creating a region and then ejecting anyone who joined the WA.

I've seen it done.

Besides, you need two endorsements to become WA delegate.

Ur'rmm, no: although two endorsements are needed to submit proposals, only one is required for Delegate status... Maybeso you're subconsciously confusing this with the fact that giving that one endorsement from one WA member to another requires having at least the two of them in the region?

[Flanderlion]

There is no such thing as "regional membership" of the WA, nor would there be any rule against a Founder creating a region and then ejecting anyone who joined the WA.

I've seen it done.

Besides, you need two endorsements to become WA delegate.

Ur'rmm, no: although two endorsements are needed to submit proposals, only one is required for Delegate status... Maybeso you're subconsciously confusing this with the fact that giving that one endorsement from one WA member to another requires having at least the two of them in the region?

Also the voting page shows 1 endorsement delegates as (2) because it is the amount of endorsements have, plus their own vote.

[Bears Armed]

Also the voting page shows 1 endorsement delegates as (2) because it is the amount of endorsements have, plus their own vote.

Good point.

[Eluvatar]

There is no such thing as "regional membership" of the WA, nor would there be any rule against a Founder creating a region and then ejecting anyone who joined the WA.

I've seen it done.

Indeed, one of the best-known regions of a former age practiced this. (The Meritocracy)

[Tinhampton]

I've seen it done.

Indeed, one of the best-known regions of a former age practiced this. (The Meritocracy)

And no mention of "join the WA and you're out!" policies would be complete without talking about that most controversial of modern-day regions, Psychotic Dictatorships. (EDIT: Official statement from DEAREST LEADER on the policy)

[Enfaru]

To re-iterate, whether a nation wishes to join the WA or not should not be my or any region founders purview something about national sovereignty. Whether the region has a seat at the world assembly or not on the other hand...

Which is why I'm trying to find out what lead to the decision to auto enrol regions into the WA and not ban nations if they want to get involved in the WA inspite of everyone else's wishes in the region.

[Bears Armed]

Which is why I'm trying to find out what lead to the decision to auto enrol regions into the WA

Because originally, back even before Delegates were given executive power, one of Max's main reasons for dividing the nations between regions was so that there'd be multiple delegates to approve [or not approve] UN proposals?

[Enfaru]

Dammit Max. -_-. Some of us want to play the Republic of China and not be in the UN. *sighs*

So now we're stuck with that position I guess even though there are more than enough delegates to decide these matters all by their lonesome. Thanks, I had anticipated that it would be a hold over from the very early days, I had no idea whatsoever however that it was because the UN was implemented top down. I always thought it was bottom up and organic organization...like the real one.

[Ever-Wandering Souls]

That's not how delegates or WA membership works. Besides, you need two endorsements to become WA delegate.

Wat. No. That's just to submit resolutions. Trust me. Me and only one other person (i.e. one endorsement) became delegate of....several regions, last night

[Sciongrad]

I'm sorry, what exactly are you proposing?

[Lockdownn]

I'm sorry, what exactly are you proposing?

Ability to disable the WA delegate position is what I'm seeing.