International Freedom Coalition (SignUp2/OOC)

[New Aeyariss]

I know this alliance is MT but...

Would you join a PMT/FT banquet if I invited y'all?

And how would I transport my delegate ?

[Aviran]

For the consideration and scrutiny of our electorate.

IFC Prime Ministerial Questionnaire

Do you, if elected, plan on appointing personal cabinet officers (Press Secretary/Chief of Staff)?

I do not, it would be the intent of my Administration to trim the fat off of a Cabinet, bloated in unnecessary areas.

Do you regard it as suitable that the Prime Minister should function in both an IC and OOC capacity?

I believe it is important that the Prime Minister be seen as both an in character and out of character moderator and administrator.

How do you plan to keep up activity among members?

By having a comprehensive continual story package, that-once started, would build upon the cannon story line of the I.F.C and would effect our organization's structures, interactions, political life, and social risings.

How do you plan to ensure quality RPing among members?

Aside from mentoring where possible, and having readily available, the information provided by NS itself regarding roleplay? By instituting a system that ranks RP's according to difficulty to achieve Quality. That way those who do not feel confident enough to RP a diplomatic gala of international weight or massive invasions that will alter the face of entire continents, will be able to know before entering, the difficulty of achieving the level of RP needed to actually keep up with the flow of events. That way players can rank up or down, depending on the quality difficulty they're comfortable with.

What is your stance on the current state of the admission system, and the relative position of the Prime Minister and Minister?

I believe the admissions system stands as a continuously evolving process that moves with the wants of current membership, and will continue to do so. Thus, it is not within my prerogative to delegate to our members, what qualifications they should and should not be including/excluding for this organization.

What is your stance on inter-alliance relations, and how would you change (or maintain) it?

With all due respect to our Foreign Minister, the state of our inter-alliance relations are frightening. Through a lack of clear policy, our status with the UL and SACTO have fallen to practically Cold War levels (geo-political pun not intended). As such, under my Administration, I would attempt to reconnect and keep status with any organization willing to reciprocate the same. Now is not a time for blind idealism and principle, now is a time for a movement towards rejoining in the common goal of what's best for our people.

How will you deal with inter/intra-alliance OOC conflict involving our members?

First and foremost, I believe we must abolish any legislation or policy that prevents a dual membership. Secondly, we must reinstate, in full, the membership of any nation willing to return, and who may have been forced to choose between this organization and another. This was not an ultimatum we had the right to make, and more importantly-it was one that stood against a central tenet of the freedom we all so vividly support. That of freedom of association. It is my belief that carrying out these points, will not only bring our membership closer, but promote better ease of channel and diplomacy between ourselves and the various other organizations out there. As to any conflict that may arise between our members and that of another? A case by case disciplinary review would be in order at that point, consequences issued to whichever party was at fault. I believe it is in this manner that we can assure fairness of judgement. To create a blanket policy on this subject would be folly, if only because there are multiple facets to a situation that flat regulation could not and will not anticipate.


Would you appoint ambassadors to other alliances?

I believe that an Ambassadorial Corps would be tantamount to good state policy, and would promote better communications and thus relations between ourselves, and other alliances. Thus, it would be my honor to appoint various individuals to serve as the voice of our organization.

Will you support inter-alliance RPs or Summits?

So long as a majority of the parties involved agreed to said RP or Summit, then it is my belief that said events not only need to be supported but promoted.

Will you incorporate regional politics into alliance politics (like sponsoring representatives of the largest regions present)?

I do not believe that regional politics are a place for this organization to be involved. Our jurisdiction lies within the international community, not the regionally continental one.

What changes (if any) would you make to the term and position structures (i.e. who appoints/elects whom and their respective duties) of the IFC?

Primarily, I would order that the office of the Minister of Defense be re purposed to serve as the Chairman of the newly created Joint Chiefs of Staff. A body that would serve by appointment, and at the pleasure of, the Prime Minister. As advisers to said administrator, and as leaders of the various facets of our RRF (Air Force, Army, Special Forces), they would also serve as Generals in the field-in command of the branch to which they were appointed. In this way, we can assure that, not only do our best and brightest military minded players have a way to participate in the senior levels of government, but that we also ease the massive responsibilities of the M.O.D, and create a clear and actionable plan in terms of deployable branches in times of war and crisis. To the point of the "10th Man In Disagreement" issue, I would also order that the Director of the Humanitarian Guard be added to the Council of Joint Chiefs, to advocate for humanitarian and civilian concerns. Apart from this, I would also abolish the Coalitional Intelligence department, an underused and un purposed Department at best, and use its funds elsewhere (as detailed at a later point in this stance-inquiry). Terms and electorate responsibilities would not change from the current Cabinet.

What is your stance on the current state of the RRF, and how would you change (or maintain) it?

Please see above.

Which branch of the RRF (if any) would you focus on building up/fleshing out?

It would be the task of each Joint Chief to develop and organize his or her own branch, and a part of the responsibilities of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs to assure that the basic tenets the Prime Minister and Council desires in the RRF are implemented within those plans.

What is your stance on equipment standardization?

I believe that it should be a priority for the RRF to standardize equipment and weapons, issued and used by/to our forces. As such, I would order said arms be developed and manufactured within member countries on a perpetual contract. Thus progressively utilizing our present talent, assuring quality, increasing employment and job growth within member countries, and standardizing our weapons and equipment simultaneously.

Would you support using RRF/Treasury equipment/funds to intervene on behalf of non-members or observers?

I would support this maneuver in a case by case basis, the viability of which would be judged by a Intervention Viability Council consisting of; the Prime Minister (as acting Executive and Chair), the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs (who will stand as the military expert of the Council), the Minister of Foreign Affairs (who will advise on the effect any intervention would have on our diplomatic efforts), as well as the Minister of Economics and Trade (who would advise on the effect any intervention would have on our financial interests, and the economic stability of the country in question after the intervention), and finally the Director of the Humanitarian Guard (who will advise on the rebuilding and or projected need of aide that will have to be dispersed to civilians effected by the intervention). A majority vote of this Council, would allow the Prime Minister to authorize intervention on behalf of a non member or observer state.

How will you ensure that member states act according to proper rules of conventional warfare?

It is my intention to alter the way we deploy forces and thus interact forum wise with altercations. Currently, our forces mobilize altogether, and plans of attack are often lost or jumbled amongst the orders given for other branches, by the singular Defense Minister. Under the Joint Chiefs and this strategy, that would no longer be a problem. We will split each branch deployed in an altercation, into separate threads using skeleton code. Those wishing to fight with whichever branch deployed, will proceed to that branch's thread where they'll see orders and rules of engagement, as well as progress and number of men lost and currently on field. The Joint Chief of the branch in question will serve as the moderator and commander of the nations choosing to fight with them. Nations could of course be in multiple threads at one time, or switch between threads; but they will always be subject to the rules and moderation of their Commanding General. Should they violate these rules, they will be warned and then kicked from the branch's thread.

What is your stance on Coalition Intelligence, and would you change (or maintain) it?

Please see "Cabinet Term Question" above.

What is your stance on the Committee system as detailed in Resolution 50, and how would you change (or maintain) it?

I believe that it is highly under utilized and look to work with the Speaker to create a viable means of realigning the committees and promoting their usage.

What is your stance on the IFC Council, and would you change (or maintain) it?

I believe that the Council is one the most consistent and beautifully simple organs the I.F.C has, and as such I will maintain it.

What is your stance on the IFC Treasury, and would you change (or maintain) it?

This department is as underutilized as they come. That is why it is the plan of my Administration to alot a portion of our annual budge to business development through the Treasury. What does that mean? Essentially this:

1. The Treasury will take these newly allotted funds, and build businesses that will be owned and operated by the I.F.C, through the Treasury (and I do mean legitimate storefronts in the Economics Forum of NS).

2. These businesses will only be built in member countries, and staffed with their citizens. Thus promoting job and economic growth within our membership.

3. The total profits of these businesses will be split 50-50. Half of it will go to the Treasury, the other half to the government of the business' host country. Through this we not only promote good will between the I.F.C and those that chose to invest time and effort into it, but we also develop countries and create a larger cash revenue to accelerate this process.

4. The 50 percent that was remitted to the Treasury will be split once more, this time into quarters. 25 percent into the treasury to be dispersed among the budget lineage, 25 percent to be invested by the Treasury into the business innovations and storefronts of observers and non members.

5. The markets and regulations of the storefronts and investment portfolios shall be jointly managed by the Treasury Minister, and the Minister of Economics and Trade.
___

The Treasury would of course, continue to retain its original duty of maintaining a budget for the I.F.C as a whole, and storing that organization's funds in reserves located in member countries.

Which is your stance on the IFTZ?

I believe it is an interesting organ within our organization, and though I have pointed purposes for its Minister, I look forward to working with him/her regarding its future.

If you support Fair Trade/Labor standards, what general measures would they suggest?

I do support fair trade and the status of anti-trust, however I do not believe that trade and labor regulations can be made without continuous input by all stake holders. As such, my Administration would arrange a quarterly summit (every 2 months), consisting of a panel (Prime Minister, Treasury Minister, and Minister of Economics and Trade), who would partake in vigorous and productive debate with business and labor leaders, to determine what would be an agreeable charter of labor and trade laws that all member businesses and labor groups that sign, would abide by. I would also mandate that non member countries and observers be included, should they wish to join.

Would you support a universal IFC currency?

I would see such as only a point of confusion and unnecessary governance on behalf of the I.F.C, and would thus vehemently oppose such a proposition.

If yes to the above, would it be optional, or mandatory?

N/A

What is your stance on the Blue Cross, and how would you change (or maintain) it?

As the current Director of the Humanitarian Guard, I fear that the Blue Cross is not being properly utilized. As such, I would order that the RRF integrate Blue Cross medics into their forces, and take a battalion of said medics with them at every deployment. Further more I would order a majority of the medics currently integrated with the RRF by donation, remitted back to their home countries, and a cease of donations of medics to the RRF. In this sense we will eliminate operational redundancies and axe non essential personnel. We will thus be saving the RRF and the I.F.C funds, stream lining our processes, and above all-families from worrying about the safety of more loved ones than necessary. Atop of that, I will allocate the funds taken from the abolition of the C.I.G and allocate them to the Humanitarian Guard for Vaccine Research, and the building of state of the art hospitals and clinics throughout willing member countries and effected areas of conflict. In this way, we will further build good will amongst governments, our peoples, and the world with which we deal, all while bringing quality health care to those that desperately need it.

Would you support incentives to encourage monetary donations to the Treasury or Blue Cross?

I believe it is important to recognize our donors, but through traditional means only. Anything aside from that, I would not support.

If yes to the above, what would be offered?

N/A

Would you support making donations to the Treasury or Blue Cross (or general coalition) mandatory?

Absolutely not, to do so changes the act of donating from one of good will, to that of forced tithing. This is not a church, thus under my Administration-donations will continue to be completely voluntary.

If yes to the above, what would be the quota (or minimum percentage of GDP)?

N/A

Anything else you would like to add:

I have learned much these past months, where I have been honored to serve the Prime Minister as the Director of her flagship program. However, in the time of her absence and great change, we now need a leader with a clear vision, and the will to lead us forward to our future. Over the course of this questionnaire you have asked me my stance on several key issues that have always faced the I.F.C. I have done my best to answer them, but not in the traditional sense. I have answered a majority of these questions, not simply with general feelings or ideals-but with cohesive plans of actions, and together, I know we can make them reality. For now is a time of great tumult, and it is within this moment that our organization will be defined for better or worse. It is here that we stand on the mountaintop of progress and success, it is here that we have walked and fought such a long journey to mount. It is here that we can peer over the valley of our accomplishments, and in the distance see the clear path of perpetual prosperity and success. And it is here, that our choice of leadership is most important. So, I ask you not to choose me simply because I ask, not simply because of my position in cabinet, nor because of any favor I may hold with some of you. No, I ask that you elect me as your next Prime Minister because I stand with the passion, the character, and above all, the plan necessary, to carry us into a new era. An era open to the minds of all members, an era open to possibilities of all situations, an era open to flexible policy and decision-for it is in a time such as this that openness is needed, for there is no greater time than this, to open the door to our future.

Let's get there together.

Signed,


Madelyn Astor
Director, I.F.C Humanitarian Guard
Delegation from the United Kingdom of Aviran

[Novo Wagondia]

Seeing as there is another Prime Ministerial bid out today, with elections set to be held tomorrow if not later tonight, I'd like to iterate again my intention to move the election date back by one week to allow for more participation in the elections in the form of debate and clarification; would everybody be okay with that?

[New Roma Republic]

Seeing as there is another Prime Ministerial bid out today, with elections set to be held tomorrow if not later tonight, I'd like to iterate again my intention to move the election date back by one week to allow for more participation in the elections in the form of debate and clarification; would everybody be okay with that?

I'm not opposed to that

[Aviran]

Seeing as there is another Prime Ministerial bid out today, with elections set to be held tomorrow if not later tonight, I'd like to iterate again my intention to move the election date back by one week to allow for more participation in the elections in the form of debate and clarification; would everybody be okay with that?

I would not be opposed to moving the date back 48 hours.

[Taigawa]

I know this alliance is MT but...

Would you join a PMT/FT banquet if I invited y'all?

And how would I transport my delegate ?

I could have Neyla take care of that bit. In my FT cannon we are borderline Tier 1 so it wouldn't be hard.

I need promission first. We wouldn't just go around opening rifts on allied worlds out of the blue.

[Flardania]

Seeing as there is another Prime Ministerial bid out today, with elections set to be held tomorrow if not later tonight, I'd like to iterate again my intention to move the election date back by one week to allow for more participation in the elections in the form of debate and clarification; would everybody be okay with that?

Sure

[Shazbotdom]

Seeing as there is another Prime Ministerial bid out today, with elections set to be held tomorrow if not later tonight, I'd like to iterate again my intention to move the election date back by one week to allow for more participation in the elections in the form of debate and clarification; would everybody be okay with that?

Sure

I'm down with that. If you are going to do a debate for the PM Position, I would hope that it would either be questions in this thread, or to make an IRC where people could go into it and either do the debate, with people viewing so that they can see what the answers are. I would also just hope that whoever does the debate would inquire as of the Candidates to see when everyone is available for the debate, so that as many candidates as possible can participate within the Debate.

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

So - let me get this straight, if I have interpreted your post correct - you are afraid of the change that would be made to certain aspects of this alliance, because they are "too radical" or they may "destabilize what we already have". If you haven't noticed, the alliance isn't in the best of shape.

You've only just arrived here. This happens every few minutes/months, it always blows over.

We don't need change for change's sake. We shouldn't vote for change without discussing both sides of the argument. Changes should be discussed, but the existing mechanisms of the alliance already provide for such change.

Let's get there together.

Signed,

Madelyn Astor
Director, I.F.C Humanitarian Guard
Delegation from the United Kingdom of Aviran

Hear hear! A list of workable, sensible, and moderate reforms, highly unlikely to imbalance the IFC.

Seeing as there is another Prime Ministerial bid out today, with elections set to be held tomorrow if not later tonight, I'd like to iterate again my intention to move the election date back by one week to allow for more participation in the elections in the form of debate and clarification; would everybody be okay with that?

Definitely. I was always aiming for sometime next month. Shall we have a candidates debate in answer to questions, perhaps using this form?

Code: Select all

[box][b][size=150][color=#FF0000]Question to the Prime Ministerial Candidates[/color][/size][/b]
<Insert your question here>[/box]

[The United Remnants of America]

I had the most inspiring and comprehensive economic, trade, medical, and employment plans just typed up, and then I go to submit?

PLEASE LOG IN!

FUCKING IDLE TIMER!

We've all suffered this bitch of a problem. I'll link bellow a Technical thread that discusses this along with fixes, but to briefly explain why this happens: NS forums are set to log out stanby accounts automatically. Therefore, if they see a nation idle for 100 minutes or something, the forum automatically logs out the account. An Admin explains better, but there are fixes mentioned here that will help you prevent losing content in the future.

Figured I'd post this as we all know the feelz of anger that rage out when this happens.

I open a second tab on Nationstates and just refresh the page or answer other forum topics while I work on a post. It takes me longer to write a post(2 or so hours), but I don't have an issue anymore.

[Flardania]

We've all suffered this bitch of a problem. I'll link bellow a Technical thread that discusses this along with fixes, but to briefly explain why this happens: NS forums are set to log out stanby accounts automatically. Therefore, if they see a nation idle for 100 minutes or something, the forum automatically logs out the account. An Admin explains better, but there are fixes mentioned here that will help you prevent losing content in the future.

Figured I'd post this as we all know the feelz of anger that rage out when this happens.

I open a second tab on Nationstates and just refresh the page or answer other forum topics while I work on a post. It takes me longer to write a post(2 or so hours), but I don't have an issue anymore.

^This or randomly saving the draft like you would do on Microsoft Word

[The United Remnants of America]

I open a second tab on Nationstates and just refresh the page or answer other forum topics while I work on a post. It takes me longer to write a post(2 or so hours), but I don't have an issue anymore.

^This or randomly saving the draft like you would do on Microsoft Word

Pfft. Who uses Word?

Drive ftw.

[Shazbotdom]

I open a second tab on Nationstates and just refresh the page or answer other forum topics while I work on a post. It takes me longer to write a post(2 or so hours), but I don't have an issue anymore.

^This or randomly saving the draft like you would do on Microsoft Word

Or every 5 or 10 minutes hit "preview".

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

When NS logs you out, if you don't panic and log in on another tab, you can then go back to the original tab press the refresh button or press the back button and then the forward button again, and all your work returns.

[Common Territories]

Like stated in the thread, there are 3 ways to prevent the log out issue.

1: One that I noted in the thread, is to keep a second tab/window open and refresh your page. Preview, refresh, and various other activities on the forum/site will cancel out the log out command - thereby refreshing the timer.

2: Writing the post in a separate word typing format like Drive or Word will protect you 100%.

3: Saving the draft will save your post if you plan on being away for a while. However. If you do this after you're already logged out, it will still kill your post. So do it promptly.

You can sometimes save your progress with the back button but my advice is "better than pissed." I suggest 2 or 3 as it's the most prompt and secure ways of saving progress. If you're lazy like me often and you will leave active posts for long periods of time, 1 will save you often; if it doesn't it at least alerts you so you can copy your post before accidentally killing it.

[Emmerian Republic]

What did I missed?

[Libraria and Ausitoria]

PM election campaigns!

[New Aeyariss]

@Dear IFC:

Yesterday an user named Aviran contacted me, inviting me to join the IFC. I am aware that he is prominent figure in here.

I am not taking any stance on this at this point, but I would like to know if there is more to it. Thank you.

[Novo Wagondia]

@Dear IFC:

Yesterday an user named Aviran contacted me, inviting me to join the IFC. I am aware that he is prominent figure in here.

I am not taking any stance on this at this point, but I would like to know if there is more to it. Thank you.

Nobody has the power to just instantly accept you, per say, so I would imagine Aviran was just extending a formal, friendly suggestion that you submit an application. Quality RPers are sought after here, after all.

[Rentalla]

@Dear IFC:

Yesterday an user named Aviran contacted me, inviting me to join the IFC. I am aware that he is prominent figure in here.

I am not taking any stance on this at this point, but I would like to know if there is more to it. Thank you.

Fill out an app and I will review it.

[Novo Wagondia]

Also, I liked Lib's idea for the debate format, and will copy his suggested template below"

Code: Select all

[box][b][size=150][color=#FF0000]Question to the Prime Ministerial Candidates[/color][/size][/b]
<Insert your question here>[/box]

If I could start out, I'd like to ask all the candidates this question:

Question to the Prime Ministerial Candidates

If elected, what is your stance on creating a judicial branch, or some similar mechanism, meant to peacefully resolve prolonged OOC disputes by jury vote?

[Organized States]

Question to the Prime Ministerial Candidates

If elected, what is your stance on creating a judicial branch, or some similar mechanism, meant to peacefully resolve prolonged OOC disputes by jury vote?

I believe that such a system is a good idea, but has the potential to be abused. I feel, that if elected, I think that a cautious effort should be made to explore such a branch and it's usefulness within the new government I plan on creating.

[New Aeyariss]

Well it is not like I want to join IFC .

I just was asking how is it possible considering views and actions of my government severely contradict this alliance's believes, at least of many of you .

[Novo Wagondia]

Well it is not like I want to join IFC .

I just was asking how is it possible considering views and actions of my government severely contradict this alliance's believes, at least of many of you .

Nations always go through changes, lol

Sometimes by Wagain sponsored military coup huehuehue

[New Aeyariss]

Well @Wagondia, year 2014 was time when Martinezists were overthrowing democracies all around the world through military coups so.... yeah, nations do change their ways.