[Last Call] Rights and Duties of World Assembly Delegates

[Comfed]

I’ve removed the warzone clause.

[Comfed]

I'm going to bring this proposal back from the retirement home and plan to submit in the... foreseeable future.

[Comfed]

Made some minor changes to writing. I am now tentatively moving this to last call.

[Marxist Germany]

OOC: You should replace the "shall" in clause 3, considering that this is the opinion of the SC, as opposed to a binding resolution.

World Assembly Delegates are permitted to exercise their World Assembly vote as they see fit, but are encouraged to do so in a way that represents the will of the region's residents;

The rewritten version would read as the SC acknowledging that WA delegates are able to exercise their vote as they see fit, as the proposal does in clause 7 with regional security, instead of it appearing as though the SC is bestowing the right upon delegates.

[Comfed]

OOC: You should replace the "shall" in clause 3, considering that this is the opinion of the SC, as opposed to a binding resolution.

World Assembly Delegates are permitted to exercise their World Assembly vote as they see fit, but are encouraged to do so in a way that represents the will of the region's residents;

The rewritten version would read as the SC acknowledging that WA delegates are able to exercise their vote as they see fit, as the proposal does in clause 7 with regional security, instead of it appearing as though the SC is bestowing the right upon delegates.

I’ve incorporated your suggestion into the draft.

[Apatosaurus]

Support, mostly.

feedback

Hereby enacts the following as the official opinion of the Security Council:
[list=1]
[*]World Assembly member-states may choose the Delegate of their region as they see fit, but the Security Council is under no obligation to recognize the legitimacy of Delegates who violate their region’s laws and customs; I think quorum raiding bad can be mentioned here?
[*]If the region has an executive Founder, the Founder may choose the powers of the World Assembly Delegate;
[list=a][*]Upon founding a region, founders are urged to remove all the powers of the Delegate "urged" is very strong wording. Try "encouraged" instead. which it is possible to remove, especially the executive power, to keep the region safe from attacks unless there is a compelling reason not to do so;

[Giovanniland]

Support, mostly.

feedback

Hereby enacts the following as the official opinion of the Security Council:
[list=1]
[*]World Assembly member-states may choose the Delegate of their region as they see fit, but the Security Council is under no obligation to recognize the legitimacy of Delegates who violate their region’s laws and customs; I think quorum raiding bad can be mentioned here?

You do know how well the proposal against quorum raiding fared at vote, I don't think it'd be a wise idea to include it here as well lest several possible for votes turn into against.

[Comfed]

I would rather keep this resolution out of gameplay debates.

[Quebecshire]

1. Upon founding a region, founders are urged to remove all the powers of the Delegate which it is possible to remove, especially the executive power, to keep the region safe from attacks unless there is a compelling reason not to do so;
2. Founders are encouraged to instead grant the legitimate Delegate a Regional Officer position which reflects the appropriate nature of the powers of that region’s Delegate;

This strikes me as kind of unnecessary. It's weird to make a perfectly valid decision something that the SC would oppose. Sure, if you're a newbie, by all means do that. Plenty of established places like 10000 Islands do that. But there's nothing wrong or particularly risky with Anteria's delegacy situation, for example. Hell, Paleocacher is a Consul in TL. I could turn the executive switch on for him and it'd make perfect sense. I just don't see the reason the SC should take the above stance. Sure, it doesn't do anything to do so, but declarations are all about global stances.

[Minskiev]

1. Upon founding a region, founders are urged to remove all the powers of the Delegate which it is possible to remove, especially the executive power, to keep the region safe from attacks unless there is a compelling reason not to do so;
2. Founders are encouraged to instead grant the legitimate Delegate a Regional Officer position which reflects the appropriate nature of the powers of that region’s Delegate;

This strikes me as kind of unnecessary. It's weird to make a perfectly valid decision something that the SC would oppose. Sure, if you're a newbie, by all means do that. Plenty of established places like 10000 Islands do that. But there's nothing wrong or particularly risky with Anteria's delegacy situation, for example. Hell, Paleocacher is a Consul in TL. I could turn the executive switch on for him and it'd make perfect sense. I just don't see the reason the SC should take the above stance. Sure, it doesn't do anything to do so, but declarations are all about global stances.

Its also pretty boring xd

My only other concerns are waivable stylistic ones. Perhaps a period at the end of the last clause and an "and" at the end of the penultimate clause?

Oh and to add onto Quebec, I don't see the need for encouraging removing every power but WA from Delegates, especially when most actual regions grant Delegates at least all non-executive powers.

[Tinhampton]

On that note, how will - or, at least, should - Articles 2 and 7 work with Frontiers? =p

[Comfed]

On that note, how will - or, at least, should - Articles 2 and 7 work with Frontiers? =p

I see no issue with 7. As for 2, remember it says if the region has an executive founder.

[Quebecshire]

After giving it some more thought, I have decided that I am completely against this proposal.

In a broad sense, what does it do? What case is it making for itself? Sure, the response might be to say that's all declarations, but not really. A declaration is to establish an interregional (or international, if we ever see more RP oriented ones) standard on something that players want a standard on, or to express an opinion. This just doesn't really do that, and I'm going to explain further why this proposal is destined to either be useless or problematic.

Any version that isn't problematic will be useless because it will be ridiculously diluted and cover only very basic things that are not really debated, and therefore do not need any sort of global standardization. This seems to be more where the resolution is at right now, and I've already explained here that it still has issues or unnecessary bits.

Not all delegacies are created equal. The Delegate of a UCR will not remotely face the same challenges as that of a GCR. But we can get even more specific! The Delegates of the South Pacific and Lazarus are security and/or ceremonial type delegacies, whereas in regions like The North Pacific and The Rejected Realms they're responsible for organizing the executive government.

Even in UCRs it's not close to uniform. While I don't think Comfed is intending to cause these issues here, I think this vein of proposal is best not being standardized. I could go on and on with more examples, but every community and government should go about molding their delegacy uniquely how they see fit, without any puffy interregional standard that tries to cram it into an ill-suited mold.

[Astrobolt]

In a broad sense, what does it do? What case is it making for itself?

I fully agree with this concern. To be honest, this resolution doesn’t give a rational as to why it should pass, or why the WA should care.

[Debussy]

Against on the lack of proper commas.

[WayNeacTia]

The thought of all this raw, unharnessed gibberish makes me wonder why the hell I or anyone else should care......